Quote:
Originally Posted by lohtse
I prefer my current method as what am happy with...just wish you could stop calibre from creating folders etc and just use current folder as it is then would be happy.
|
You probably know that calibre uses the directory structure to keep track of books for conversion, adding metadata to the actual files, storing different formats of the same book and many others.
You probably don't want to do any of these things but many of us do. Perhaps there is an better way to keep track, but if so why are there not a few thousand better programs being distributed?
I understand that you have spent many years building your own unique system and are reluctant to change any part of it. But the calibre developers, of which there are quite a few have collectively invested far more time in theirs, and they continually update and improve things.
It is open source so you could rewrite the file storage parts yourself, but you would probably be out of the new feature/improvement loop. Still if you could actually demonstrate a better working model, the calibre people might consider it. One never knows.
I think you may have an exaggerated idea about the extra space taken up by the additional folders and subfolders. There is overhead because of the metadata.opf and the cover.jpg files and I myself have no use or liking for these files. But the benefits of calibre far outweigh the minor inconvenience of copying or deleting all of these files if I want to make a backup.
Then again I don't have 440000 books either
Just curious, is that 440000 books with no duplicates? If not how on earth do you handle duplicate file names in one directory with out resorting to some mickey mouse method of naming them as in filename1 and filename2 etc.
Helen