[davidfor]

Originally Posted by sealbeater

it was, I'm not sure where that came from, perhaps an error during editing.

It was in your post, so you typed it.

I said cute because you seem to be implying a gui window full of text is analogous to a ssh terminial session. That's....very debatable.

If they are displaying the same information, how are they not analogous?

Fair enough. I would never force my way on anyone, I will however talk about my way.

I do think my paradigm is better than everyone else's. I apologize for being insulting...I was a bit on the defensive. I hope you can forgive me. But yea, my way is better. For me, because I know most of you aren't there but better in an overall sense as well.

In that case, check what you are typing. It is coming off as "there is only one way to do it and everyone else is doing it wrong and are idiots".

It's automated. I don't have to do anything but feed it a directory of books. I can spawn as many threads as my hardware and network can handle. I don't have to hand edit anything. I don't even have to check. If it doesn't find enough information to identify the book positively, it doesn't get moved to my sorted dir.




I don't have to. That's the whole point. My scripts so far, are perfect. Every time I add a new book, they get exactly the right metadata, I don't need to examine it, why would I?

It amazes me you guys do it any other way.

And it amazes me that you have some magical source of metadata that is perfect. Or it means you have prepared the books ahead of time to make sure that the data that is being used for the lookup the metadata is perfect. Or maybe your source for the books has already done the clean-up. If that is the case, then it explains the difference in how we work. I am importing a book from some source that may or may not have an accurate title or author. Or include an ISBN. You just need to look at the inconsistent titles used by the shops and other sources. I first need to fix those details. And only then can I expect to get the right metadata from the metadata sources I use. And even then, those sources can be inconsistent. The series name is the most common problem (Ben Aaronovitch has a series that is called "Rivers of London", "Peter Grant" or "PC Peter Grant" depending on the source).

All that makes me amazed that your scripts are perfect and need no intervention.

You are happy with your scripts. I am happy with my methods. Maybe if I was interested in collecting millions of books I would have to change the process. But, I am only collecting books that I have some expectation of reading in the near future. I rarely add more than a couple of books at a time.

What do you need? You have the series, the title, the author, the year it was published and the ISBN. I could adjust for more but I have no need to. If you had that need, I'm sure a way could be found to include it.


If I want Stephen King, it's not hard to find...if I want The Expanse, it's not hard to find. If I want Odd Thomas or Xanth, same.

But, that isn't how I choose a book. Yes, sometimes I go looking for the next in a series or an author or a particular book. But, I'm much more likely to be after a genre or style or something. Generally, I look at the list of books and see what catches my eye. It might be the title, the author or the series. Or I filter the list a bit based on something. And in the past when I did this with paper books, it might be the cover (or simply what was easy to grab on my way out the door for my commute to work when I remembered I was nearly finished my current book). Something catches my attention and I look at the details. Using calibre or my ereader, it is easy to read the synopsis and maybe a quick glance at the tags. And maybe the page count if I'm after a quick read. The choice of a book to read is based on my mood and seeing some that fits that. That doesn't work well with the file listing, unless, as I suggested, that file name was several thousands of characters long.


Of course, maybe the problem is that we don't have the benefit of your "perfect" scripts. We have to stick with the terrible tools and processes that we have available. How about you publish your scripts so that we can all see the light?