4 ms·
Yes it should replicate the functionality user expects - save everything into temporary file and overwrite the original file only on explicit save action. As f
by rini17 3y ago
Yes it should replicate the functionality user expects - save everything into temporary file and overwrite the original file only on explicit save action.
As for Git, it would benefit from using text format specifically aimed for easy diffing/merging. No idea how easy the sqlite dump is in this regard.
- bawolff 3y ago> Yes it should replicate the functionality user expects Do users really expect this now a days? Most users use cloud apps, and almost all of those save after every operation automatically.
- raxxorraxor 3y agoWhich is a compromise for using browsers really. It isn't a good solution and no user really understands this and I believe it is the most hated feature of the new cloud world. Yes, leaving the page open for multiple hours might now allow you to save because your access token expired. No, communication in the background is unreliable too. Autosave is a bad band aid for a bad solution. Doing periodic and automatic saves is good. Doing so on a document "in production" is majorly stupid. Not that I want to accidentally validate the busy work dev ops puts us through.
- bawolff 3y agoIts pretty easy to make a cloud app that emulates the traditional working draft/save workflow. Browsers all have pretty reliable local storage technology now a days if your network is unstable. I don't think this design choice is a compromise of the medium. If anything it seems like if you were going to have to compromise for web you would do it in the other direction so apps are more usable during poor network conditions. I would say the traditional model is a compromise from back when disks were unacceptably slow to be saving constantly.
- gwd 3y ago> As for Git, it would benefit from using text format specifically aimed for easy diffing/merging. No idea how easy the sqlite dump is in this regard. The problem I'd predict here is that then people would expect to be able to do three-way merges. It might even work correctly a lot of the time, depending on the exact pattern of changes. But my gut feel is that unless the schema were designed just right, there would be possible merges that would result in a database that was valid from SQLite's point of view but insane from the application's point of view (broke expected variants, etc).
- bawolff 3y agoIf you want to use flat files you should just use flat files. There are plenty of unix tools to treat them like DB. You're not going to have a sensible text version of a btree that is reasonably editable by a text editor.
- massysett 3y agoI set up my Git to use the SQLite dump on SQLite files when using “git diff”. This at least shows me the changes row-by-row, or shows nothing if no changes. I don’t expect to be able to merge though.
- mcpackieh 3y agoI have been told that the new generation of users does not expect, want or appreciate applications that use explicit saves. I've also been told that they don't understand or even want to understand folders...
- rini17 3y agoThe context here is someone using git. Who presumably understands folders.