GNOME Bugzilla – Bug 507232
Enable creation of new set
Last modified: 2011-03-16 03:50:59 UTC
(from debian bts #445845) I frequently upload batch of photos from, say, my last vacation. When doing that I always want to create a new set for the batch I'm uploading. Unfortunately ATM postr only upload to add pictures to an existing set. Is it possible to add support for creating a new set containing the pictures that are going to be uploaded?
I 2nd this! I'll probably not use postr unless this feature exists.
I'm not sure if this is currently supported by the flickr python API shipped with postr... the most recent flickrpy module supports it indeed, though.
Of course it is supported by the python bindings, the API can call arbitrary methods. This is entirely a user-interface issue and due to not using postr any more and lack of time, I haven't got around to implementing it.
(In reply to comment #3) > Of course it is supported by the python bindings, the API can call arbitrary > methods. This is entirely a user-interface issue and due to not using postr > any more and lack of time, I haven't got around to implementing it. Ross, What are you using instead?
Adobe Lightroom and the Flickr uploader on a Mac.
I'm interested in fixing this bug, but we'd need to decide on how the solution would look. Here are two options as I see them. option 1: when creating a new photoset, always add all photos from the current upload to that photoset. Users will still have the option of including individual photos into photosets of their choosing. There would be an additional button, probably next to the upload button to help distinguish this choice from the image-level options to add all photos to new photoset. option 2: support the creation of n new photosets in an upload session. Each photo potentially being in multiple new photosets, in addition to already existing ones. Purely from a user experience point of view, which of these would users like to have? Obviously option 2 provides more options and flexibility, while option 1 makes the choice for the user much simpler. Will users ever want option 2? Maybe option 1 is sufficient and if someone wants the second option that can be a separate bug/feature request. It seems like one comment users have of postr is the inability to create new photosets _at all_ not even taking into account that level of flexibility. I can't check on this machine as for some reason my fspot sqlite db is corrupted, but it doesn't look like fspot export to flickr has set a precedent as it won't create new photosets either. Even flickr's own workflow has users upload, then afterwards organize their new photos into a new set.
(In reply to comment #6) > [...] > Maybe option 1 is sufficient and if someone wants the second option that can be > a separate bug/feature request. It seems like one comment users have of postr > is the inability to create new photosets _at all_ not even taking into account > that level of flexibility. I agree with this rationale. I would recomend you to work on the option 1.
Created attachment 147834 [details] [review] adds the ability to createa a new photoset as a part of an upload This patch adds another default entry in the "Add to Set" combobox to create a photoset w/the upload. By default, the photoset will be named, "new photoset (%m-%d-%y)" but can be renamed via the "rename" button that appears next to it when this option is selected. If the upload is interrupted, or if the upload session is saved, the new photoset's name will be preserved on load. The newly created photoset behaves the same way as an already existing set, in that all photos must be specified to the new set in order to be included. Only one new photoset can be created per upload.
(In reply to comment #8) > Created an attachment (id=147834) [details] [review] > adds the ability to createa a new photoset as a part of an upload > > This patch adds another default entry in the "Add to Set" combobox to create a > photoset w/the upload. By default, the photoset will be named, "new photoset > (%m-%d-%y)" but can be renamed via the "rename" button that appears next to it > when this option is selected. If the upload is interrupted, or if the upload > session is saved, the new photoset's name will be preserved on load. The newly > created photoset behaves the same way as an already existing set, in that all > photos must be specified to the new set in order to be included. Only one new > photoset can be created per upload. Can't thank you enough for this feature! I definitely think option 1 as you implemented it is perfect. ( I am still figuring out how to get the patch and apply it to the source code ... but the concept is perfect )
(In reply to comment #9) > (In reply to comment #8) > [...] > Can't thank you enough for this feature! I definitely think option 1 as you > implemented it is perfect. ( I am still figuring out how to get the patch and > apply it to the source code ... but the concept is perfect ) sclpunk: You need to download the patch and then use git. You can do it through: $ wget -O postr-newset.diff "https://bugzilla.gnome.org/attachment.cgi?id=147834" $ git clone git://git.gnome.org/postr $ cd postr $ git apply ../postr-newset.diff If the patch was applied correctly, it would work. I have not have enough time to test it in calm, but I would do as soon as I can. Comments from people who have tested it are welcomed.
(In reply to comment #10) > (In reply to comment #9) > > (In reply to comment #8) > > [...] > > Can't thank you enough for this feature! I definitely think option 1 as you > > implemented it is perfect. ( I am still figuring out how to get the patch and > > apply it to the source code ... but the concept is perfect ) > > sclpunk: > > You need to download the patch and then use git. You can do it through: > > $ wget -O postr-newset.diff > "https://bugzilla.gnome.org/attachment.cgi?id=147834" > $ git clone git://git.gnome.org/postr > $ cd postr > $ git apply ../postr-newset.diff > > If the patch was applied correctly, it would work. > > I have not have enough time to test it in calm, but I would do as soon as > I can. Comments from people who have tested it are welcomed. Most excellent. I had already installed git and cloned it, but I had not yet figured out how to apply the patch. So perfect. I'll do that and give you feedback. Thanks again, Shane
Review of attachment 147834 [details] [review]: the patch works well, but I'm sure with the dialog to rename the photoset. I think with one label "Name for the new photoset" is enough ::: src/SetCombo.py @@ -91,0 +102,6 @@ + + def update_new_photoset_name(self, new_photoset_name): + self.new_photoset_name = new_photoset_name \ ... 3 more ... Should we use a macro to refer to the new set? instead of 1 @@ -91,0 +102,19 @@ + + def update_new_photoset_name(self, new_photoset_name): + self.new_photoset_name = new_photoset_name \ ... 16 more ... if I change the name and then go back and edit it. The dialog shouldn't say "new photoset...",
*but I'm not sure
Review of attachment 147834 [details] [review]: ::: src/SetCombo.py @@ -91,0 +102,6 @@ + + def update_new_photoset_name(self, new_photoset_name): + self.new_photoset_name = new_photoset_name \ ... 3 more ... can do. i agree in hindsight that the magic numbers are a bit suboptimal. @@ -91,0 +102,19 @@ + + def update_new_photoset_name(self, new_photoset_name): + self.new_photoset_name = new_photoset_name \ ... 16 more ... that's an odd question about implementation vs user expectation. it's still technically a "new photoset" until the user uploads the first picture in it. and at that point that entry in the photoset combobox becomes an actual entry and a new "new photoset" entry is inserted.
o no ... sorry, I should explein myself better, I have 3 comments about the patch: 1) the patch works well, but I'm not sure with the dialog to rename the photoset. I think with one label "Name for the new photoset" is enough 2) ::: src/SetCombo.py @@ -91,0 +102,6 @@ + + def update_new_photoset_name(self, new_photoset_name): + self.new_photoset_name = new_photoset_name \ ... 3 more ... Should we use a macro to refer to the new photoset path? instead of 1 3) @@ -91,0 +102,19 @@ + + def update_new_photoset_name(self, new_photoset_name): + self.new_photoset_name = new_photoset_name \ ... 16 more ... if I change the photoset's name and then go back and I edit it again. The dialog should say the new name. (In reply to comment #14) > Review of attachment 147834 [details] [review]: > > ::: src/SetCombo.py > @@ -91,0 +102,6 @@ > + > + def update_new_photoset_name(self, new_photoset_name): > + self.new_photoset_name = new_photoset_name \ > ... 3 more ... > > can do. i agree in hindsight that the magic numbers are a bit suboptimal. > > @@ -91,0 +102,19 @@ > + > + def update_new_photoset_name(self, new_photoset_name): > + self.new_photoset_name = new_photoset_name \ > ... 16 more ... > > that's an odd question about implementation vs user expectation. it's still > technically a "new photoset" until the user uploads the first picture in it. > and at that point that entry in the photoset combobox becomes an actual entry > and a new "new photoset" entry is inserted.
yes, i think i understood you. here are my responses to each comment (In reply to comment #15) > o no ... sorry, I should explein myself better, I have 3 comments about the > patch: > > 1) the patch works well, but I'm not sure with the dialog to rename the > photoset. I think with one label "Name for the new photoset" is enough ok. i'll incorporate that into a new patch. > > 2) > ::: src/SetCombo.py > @@ -91,0 +102,6 @@ > + > + def update_new_photoset_name(self, new_photoset_name): > + self.new_photoset_name = new_photoset_name \ > ... 3 more ... > > Should we use a macro to refer to the new photoset path? instead of 1 in hindsight, i totally agree. not sure why i didn't do that in the first place. **hates magic numbers** > > > 3) > @@ -91,0 +102,19 @@ > + > + def update_new_photoset_name(self, new_photoset_name): > + self.new_photoset_name = new_photoset_name \ > ... 16 more ... > > if I change the photoset's name and then go back and I edit it again. The > dialog should say the new name. it doesn't do this? are you talking about the "Create photoset" part of the title? i think i want to make sure that it's obvious that this is the "new photoset" and that's what you have named it. that way you realize that you can't create more than one photoset per upload (yet?) and i think that it helps to keep context if you then go to another photo and want to add it to the new photoset but might have forgotten what you named it.
(In reply to comment #16) > [...] > > > > > > 3) > > @@ -91,0 +102,19 @@ > > + > > + def update_new_photoset_name(self, new_photoset_name): > > + self.new_photoset_name = new_photoset_name \ > > ... 16 more ... > > > > if I change the photoset's name and then go back and I edit it again. The > > dialog should say the new name. > > it doesn't do this? are you talking about the "Create photoset" part of the > title? i think i want to make sure that it's obvious that this is the "new > photoset" and that's what you have named it. that way you realize that you > can't create more than one photoset per upload (yet?) and i think that it helps > to keep context if you then go to another photo and want to add it to the new > photoset but might have forgotten what you named it. no, I was talking about the second label of the rename dialog. But if you were agree with the comment 1), this have no relevance. the rest work fine
Created attachment 148174 [details] [review] adds the ability to create a new photoset as a part of an upload *removed a bunch of magic numbers in setcombo *removed the behavior of the rename dialog cancel button reverting the photoset name to the default.
First: this is excellent. Second: I hate to do it, but I might add that it seems to me the most likely and common use of this function ( and maybe postr in general ) will be to select a FOLDER of images to send to Flickr, and at the same time put them in their own set. The functionality you added takes care of the new set - however - it would make postr that much more usable if it allowed the selection of a folder (instead of individual sets of images) AND perhaps defaulted the new photoset name to that folder name. Just a suggestion. I should get off my duff and figure out how to do the coding myself...but you are probably better suited to it than me! In any event, many thanks for an excellent program.
Review of attachment 148174 [details] [review]: work nice!
Review of attachment 148174 [details] [review]: I removed a couple of traling spaces and I committed it. Thanks.
This problem has been fixed in the development version. The fix will be available in the next major software release. Thank you for your bug report.
*** Bug 637084 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 644872 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***