Content Finder

[rivimey]

In another thread bigvern wrote:

For example there are a couple of threads running on European routes which mention the difficulty of locating all the assets and one where the route builder themselves has apparently stated they can't remember where they got them!

I am in the process of creating a program that you can feed in a list of filenames - e.g. those provided by RW Tools as missing assets - and it spits out a list of packages you are in need of, hopefully with a link to a relevant web page. In part it relies on the UKTS Catalog CSV file which can be downloaded, but it will also be able to cope with items from other places.

I haven't yet finished it, and TBH I'm not quite sure if it will be generally acceptable - please shout if you like or dislike the idea!

Regards
Ruth

[gswindale]

sounds good to me; although I'd prefer the ability for route producers to include all the assets required (exc payware obviously) in the download. I seem to recall spending several hours trying to download stuff for W&B and it would have been much easier to just download the one file.

[andynwt]

sounds good to me; although I'd prefer the ability for route producers to include all the assets required (exc payware obviously) in the download.

Fully agreed. That this generally isn't the case puts me off downloading most routes.

[Kariban]

I am in the process of creating a program that you can feed in a list of filenames - e.g. those provided by RW Tools as missing assets - and it spits out a list of packages you are in need of, hopefully with a link to a relevant web page. In part it relies on the UKTS Catalog CSV file which can be downloaded, but it will also be able to cope with items from other places.

I haven't yet finished it, and TBH I'm not quite sure if it will be generally acceptable - please shout if you like or dislike the idea!

Regards
Ruth

Works for me, thanks. One thing you might want it to do is spit out a list of IDs to put in the bulk search option, which would basically do all the provision of links for you.

[msey0002]

Sounds good Ruth.

On the question of one package, we really must start accepting that sometimes permission isn't so freely given. Not ideal, but we have to work around it.

However, things are looking up though, many developers are releasing assets and allowing them to be packaged

[Kariban]

On the question of one package, we really must start accepting that sometimes permission isn't so freely given. Not ideal, but we have to work around it.

There are good technical reasons for this ( and this argument has gone around in the past ), the one that sticks out is version control. What happens if I update a package with lots of new functionality and someone somewhere doesn't update it in their asset pack? it just gets overwritten with the old one. Now what happens if someone's written a scenario with the functionality of my new version? the asset pack has just broken their scenario.

We just need better content management tools, not monolithic duplication of assets everywhere.

[bigvern]

That sounds like an excellent idea.

As regards version control, I have a feeling the installer doesn't always overwrite items that you already have in your asset collection but I'm not sure how sophisticated this is.

[msey0002]

I'm not knocking the reasons or the withholding of permission, Simon, I'm just saying it's an unfortunate situation we must learn to live with

[Kariban]

What we need is a bulk downloader, it appears you can bulk install easily enough, thankfully.

[msey0002]

being a non premium member adds to the frustration also . Although, I guess I am 'lucky' enough to work on a computer practically all day, so I just keep the queue in the background while I work.

What I normally do when a fantastic behemoth like Wales and Borders comes out is I buy a short term membership just to be able to download those assets. Thus, I end up paying around 3-5euro (forgot how much the shortest one is) for a route which could easily sell for 15 to 20euro. Very good value that!

[mikesimpson]

There are good technical reasons for this ( and this argument has gone around in the past ), the one that sticks out is version control. What happens if I update a package with lots of new functionality and someone somewhere doesn't update it in their asset pack? it just gets overwritten with the old one. Now what happens if someone's written a scenario with the functionality of my new version? the asset pack has just broken their scenario.

We just need better content management tools, not monolithic duplication of assets everywhere.

True, but what is being talked about here is Assets for a route and let's face it, most route Assets are only scenery items which will never be updated ever. The only ones which might need version control are things like animated objects, turntables or signals etc. Everything else is just a painted box

Mike

[Kariban]

Well, there are also assets for scenarios; some of those have big enough lists that they've made me "put it off for later", which of course means I never get around to it :p

[Shadders]

I like the sound of this, I note that rivimey stated that the program would correlate missing assets to web pages, not download them, so I don’t see anyone having a problem with that. People will still have to use UKTS or other sites to download the assets, so there should be no issue with newer versions as long as the file ID is the same.

RWTools is a godsend with regard to finding what’s missing in a route/scenario but turning the file names into what to download from where can be quite tricky if the author has forgotten to include them in the read me. I’m not having a dig or anything; it’s very easy to miss something off. Even payware assets sometimes have a problem. To err is human as they say.

So, good idea, rivimey!

With regard to the whole packaging of assets for routes, yes it would be nice. But I agree that ultimately authors should be able to distribute their hard work as they see fit. Be that here, on similar sites or on their own websites.

I do remember Matt (NeutronIC) toying with the idea of offering an option to authors to “release” their work. I’m not sure how far down the line he went with defining the statement, but I took it to mean allowing others to bundle their work in routes or scenarios. I hope I haven’t inadvertently dredged up anything that should not be spoken about or is best forgotten, but I would be interested to know what outcome there was, if any.

Cheers,

Shadders.

[rivimey]

I like the sound of this, I note that rivimey stated that the program would correlate missing assets to web pages, not download them, so I don’t see anyone having a problem with that.

That's right... it might not even point you at the exact page - it depends on the site - but it will at least say "it was there and was called this". I'm including a flag to say it's been deleted, too - so at least it's possible to see/filter out the things that are no longer available.

People will still have to use UKTS or other sites to download the assets, so there should be no issue with newer versions as long as the file ID is the same.

RWTools is a godsend with regard to finding what’s missing in a route/scenario but turning the file names into what to download from where can be quite tricky if the author has forgotten to include them in the read me.

That is the exact problem I'm trying to solve.

So, good idea, rivimey!

[AndiS]

Sounds like one of these things I meant to be doing for a long time.

So you are going to download all that is at UKTS to get the content list of all the RPKs?
"Ruth's asset catalogue" would certainly be a worthy complement to "Obo's engine catalogue".
For the lesser known sites, it could become quite some task to track them, but once your catalogue gets some popularity, people will volunteer information, be it the host or a local fan of the site.