Re: Ansel::listGalleries()
"Heath S. Hendrickson" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.horde.ansel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Ben Chavet wrote: > Quoting Chuck Hagenbuch <[email protected]>: > >> Quoting Ben Chavet <[email protected]>: >> >>> Hashing is good, now for the details :) >>> >>> do we want: >>> ansel/hash/image_full >>> ansel/hash/image_screen >>> ansel/hash/image_thumb >>> >>> or: >>> ansel/full/hash/image >>> ansel/screen/hash/image >>> ansel/thumb/hash/image >>> >>> I personally like the 2nd option because it just feels cleaner. >> >> >> I'd prefer the first, since that way you have all copies of an image in >> the same >> place - relevant if you're ever poking around on the command line >> instead of >> through code. > > > Good point, but how about storage efficiency? the 1st option will > have 3 times > as many files in any given directory as the 2nd option. How about a > combiniation: > > ansel/hash/full/image > ansel/hash/screen/image > ansel/hash/thumb/image > > I'm just trying to think ahead as far as possible, so we don't have to go > through this process again. > > --Ben Or a combination of the two... ansel/hash/full/image ansel/hash/created/image_(screen|thumb|micro) That would keep the originals in their own directory (that's all that really relevant anyway, and makes for easier backup... the screen and thumbs can easily be recreated) and the created images in their own directory. Though I'm not married to the idea or anything. I do like the idea of keeping the full size images separate for backup purposes, however. h -- ansel mailing list - Join the hunt: http://horde.org/bounties/#ansel Frequently Asked Questions: http://horde.org/faq/ To unsubscribe, mail: [email protected]