Calibre - An excellent program, but no thanks

[ilovejedd]

Originally Posted by dvs0826

The conversions are great. That's one of the awesome things mentioned above. But again I don't think it's really relevant to this thread, which is about the directory structure.

I actually think the conversion functionality is one of the most logical reasons for Calibre's current directory layout. It's easy to store files all over the place but what happens when you convert? Where does it save the new file? What filename does it use? What if there's a filename conflict?

Each person has their own conventions likely based on their use scenario. What might be ideal for one person is not ideal for another. Sure, you might keep your directory all organized but someone else might just be dumping their ebooks in a single flat directory. The latest version of Calibre now has the ability to export files to a customizable layout/structure based on available metadata (albeit, I just installed 0.6.8 and haven't exactly tested the feature yet). I think it strikes a pretty good balance between Calibre's need to have a logical and easily navigable structure (at least to itself) and a user's needs to keep their books in a layout that's logical to them.

By the way, I don't like Calibre's directory structure either - I just use the conversion utilities and the Stanza server. However, I can understand how it makes it easier for the program to locate files.

Another thing I'd like to point out since you seem to have quite a bit of technical know how. Calibre's source code is freely available and downloadable. If you don't like something, then you can easily change it yourself. Well, the "easily" part might be questionable, but changing it is certainly doable.

@kovid
Just a thought, is it possible to add an option in the "Saving books" tab to convert spaces to underscore _ or something? If yes, I'll add the ticket. Thanks!

[ilovejedd]

Originally Posted by dvs0826

Well, copying 10GB of data is a pretty slow operation. I would wager that's a much worse bottleneck than reading the PDF metadata, although I haven't tested it.

Nah. If you're only copying locally, 10GB should go by pretty fast. Assuming a fairly modern drive, less than 5 minutes. Of course, that estimate is based on speed of copying DVD, HD-DVD and Blu-ray rips. Copying a couple thousand small files would probably take a bit longer.

[dvs0826]

Originally Posted by ilovejedd

Another thing I'd like to point out since you seem to have quite a bit of technical know how. Calibre's source code is freely available and downloadable. If you don't like something, then you can easily change it yourself. Well, the "easily" part might be questionable, but changing it is certainly doable.

I've thought about it, but I'm a C++ person, not a Python person. Not that I couldn't learn Python, I've been meaning to do so for a long time now anyway, but I just have other priorities at the moment.

The conversion thing is a good question, I guess the best answer off the top of my head would be that in case the user chose the advanced option (assuming the scheme I mentioned in the previous post), it would present an additional option "where should Calibre store converted books?" and it would require an empty folder, in which it would place books using the current layout scheme. Maybe something better could be arrived at with some more thought.

I'm only pushing this because while I see the advantages of the current scheme, I also see advantages in the other scheme. And both have perfectly legitimate uses that appeal to a large number of people. Perfect scenario for a user-option. If I was the only person who wanted to keep my own custom directory layout I'd have dropped it already but it's obviously a high demand feature request, evidenced by the fact that someone on page 2 said "well then maybe people would stop asking for it" and all the other people in the thread who have said "I can't believe so many people want this feature".

[kovidgoyal]

Originally Posted by ilovejedd

@kovid
Just a thought, is it possible to add an option in the "Saving books" tab to convert spaces to underscore _ or something? If yes, I'll add the ticket. Thanks!

It's possible, but why?

[kovidgoyal]

Originally Posted by dvs0826

I'm only pushing this because while I see the advantages of the current scheme, I also see advantages in the other scheme. And both have perfectly legitimate uses that appeal to a large number of people. Perfect scenario for a user-option. If I was the only person who wanted to keep my own custom directory layout I'd have dropped it already but it's obviously a high demand feature request, evidenced by the fact that someone on page 2 said "well then maybe people would stop asking for it" and all the other people in the thread who have said "I can't believe so many people want this feature".

10~100 people have requested this feature, calibre has 300,000 users.

[kovidgoyal]

Let me put it this way: I already spend all the time I possibly can fixing calibre bugs and implementing new features. The list of new features I want to implement is huge and all of them are demanded by far more (though less vocal) people. I know that implementing this feature will increase my support burden. IOW, this is not going to happen, unless someone else implements it *and* commits to handling all the support requests is generates.

[dvs0826]

I already know it's not going to happen But we both know that 10~100 people requesting feature does not mean that only 10~100 want the feature. Far more people just never say anything about missing features they'd like.

And for the record, I'm not being vocal just to be vocal. Only saying that the attitude in this thread is pretty piss poor, basically telling people to either like it the way it is or GTFO. Not talking about you, but some of the other people posting in the thread. Don't patronize people because they want to see a piece of software they like improve.

[kovidgoyal]

Just visit the calibre bug tracker to see how many open feature requests there are.

More people request conversion to/from LRF in a month (a dying format that has been abandoned by its only corporate sponsor) than the total number of requests I've seen for this feature.

[ilovejedd]

Originally Posted by kovidgoyal

It's possible, but why?

Spaces in filenames (and quite a bit of non-ASCII characters) are sometimes badly supported when uploading to webhosts. Plus, since I use command line a lot, spaces in filenames just bug me. On that note, a convert to lower case would probably be nice, too.

This request is only if it wouldn't be too much trouble of course. Just tell me if I should add the ticket.

[kovidgoyal]

Originally Posted by ilovejedd

Spaces in filenames (and quite a bit of non-ASCII characters) are sometimes badly supported when uploading to webhosts. Plus, since I use command line a lot, spaces in filenames just bug me. On that note, a convert to lower case would probably be nice, too.

This request is only if it wouldn't be too much trouble of course. Just tell me if I should add the ticket.

Sure this is easy to do. Note that calibre already converts non ASCII chars to ASCII by default

[ilovejedd]

Originally Posted by kovidgoyal

Sure this is easy to do. Note that calibre already converts non ASCII chars to ASCII by default

Thanks! Ticket created: http://calibre.kovidgoyal.net/ticket/3246

[tompe]

Originally Posted by Kostas

I really can't understand all these complains about a free product...
Noone forces us to use it.

An open source project works because people donate their time and give feedback and say what they like and give suggestions for enhancements or write code that is submitted. An open source will not work if people just are told to shut up because they have not payed anything when they point out problems or suggest improvements.

[mrmikel]

A number of very vocal people are very free in their demands. Yet none of them, to whom the file structure of Calibre seems a matter of life and death, seems to be willing to do anything about it themselves. See the folk tale the little red hen.

If it is so important, then one or more of these people should take the source code, learn python if they have to and fix the perceived problem.

Their problem is that the rest of us users who care nothing about the file structure and more about its use in creating ebooks are too busy using it to criticize it. The rest of us are thankful that Kovid is so responsive to our use questions and is continually updating it, unlike very many open source projects...see Kompozer, which I also use and enjoy.

Kovid doesn't have to do this at all. If I were him I would be inclined to say all this static is not worth it for something he is offering for FREE with only REQUESTS for donations.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by mrmikel

If it is so important, then one or more of these people should take the source code, learn python if they have to and fix the perceived problem.

But you might have to branch the project to include your solution.

Their problem is that the rest of us users who care nothing about the file structure and more about its use in creating ebooks are too busy using it to criticize it.

And you are not contributing any to the project by just using it. Open source projects works because people do more than just use the program.

The rest of us are thankful that Kovid is so responsive to our use questions and is continually updating it, unlike very many open source projects...see Kompozer, which I also use and enjoy.

Kovid doesn't have to do this at all. If I were him I would be inclined to say all this static is not worth it for something he is offering for FREE with only REQUESTS for donations.

Maybe the problem is that the project is associated with just one person. It might be hard to get more developers. And the request for donations does not help in getting more developers for what it says is "this is my project" and does not really stimulate other people to participate.

[ilovejedd]

Originally Posted by tompe

But you might have to branch the project to include your solution.

Nope. You'll just have to provide bugfixes and support for your changes:

Originally Posted by kovidgoyal

Let me put it this way: I already spend all the time I possibly can fixing calibre bugs and implementing new features. The list of new features I want to implement is huge and all of them are demanded by far more (though less vocal) people. I know that implementing this feature will increase my support burden. IOW, this is not going to happen, unless someone else implements it *and* commits to handling all the support requests is generates.

Originally Posted by tompe

Maybe the problem is that the project is associated with just one person. It might be hard to get more developers. And the request for donations does not help in getting more developers for what it says is "this is my project" and does not really stimulate other people to participate.

Not really. I seem to recall Kovid mentioning a lot of the conversion algorithms by other people and not him. I believe someone has mentioned this before, if people really want this feature and are not willing to code themselves, they can raise a bounty so someone else would have the motivation to do so. Unfortunately, doing it that way would probably mean a fork of the project as I don't foresee whoever wrote the code staying around for bugfixes and support once the bounty has been collected.