No you can't ! I will see what I can do for that in futur version 4.1.il n’y a pas un moyen (pas trop difficile) pour qui je puisse édité a la main un groupage sur un champ personnalisé de mon choix ?
[FR][EN] Ant Movie Catalog 4.2.1 (04/11/17)
Well, I´m not a good translator and we already may have someone for german translation, but I could do some BETA testing for old XP version.
Any preferred testing environment or any special tests?
Currently I´m working on XP SP1 with two catalogs of about 1800 movies and 170MB each including pictures.
I also used to write some scripts, so I can do some script testing if needed.
Any idea when we can expect BETA 4.1?
Any preferred testing environment or any special tests?
Currently I´m working on XP SP1 with two catalogs of about 1800 movies and 170MB each including pictures.
I also used to write some scripts, so I can do some script testing if needed.
Any idea when we can expect BETA 4.1?
Inconsistency?
Maybe something to think about.
When I import a second or third catalog with different custom fields, the custom fields of the imported catalog are lost/not shown. Every movie now only has the custom fileds of the first catalog.
I expected ALL custom fields from ALL catalogs for ALL movies.
--- EDIT
It works fine if the custom fields of second catalog are of same name an type than in first. Data will then be imported.
When I import a second or third catalog with different custom fields, the custom fields of the imported catalog are lost/not shown. Every movie now only has the custom fileds of the first catalog.
I expected ALL custom fields from ALL catalogs for ALL movies.
--- EDIT
It works fine if the custom fields of second catalog are of same name an type than in first. Data will then be imported.
I see things like this.I expected ALL custom fields from ALL catalogs for ALL movies.
First you create your own catalog with your custom fields.
After you can import values from other catalog and if custom fields are differents, then your job is to match fields from other catalog to your own catalog fields (click on header column to choose field). If types are differents, then conversion of field values will be done internally as better as possible.
Now if you want to import the custom fields of others catalogs, then use import/export in custom fields manager. Import will not remove your own catalog fields, just add missing fields or change properties if are differents
.hm, not so for me.Now if you want to import the custom fields of others catalogs, then use import/export in custom fields manager. Import will not remove your own catalog fields, just add missing fields or change properties if are differents .
If I import the fields from catalog 2 (which I have exported before) in catalog 1 then
case 1 - the new fields are imported while the actual are deleted.
case 2 - no fields are imported.
For example, I created a field called "VHS" (Boolean) in catalog 1 and a field called "DVD" (string) in catalog 2 which I export in each case. When I import VHS.xml in cat 2 then filed DVD is vanishing, when I import "DVD" in cat 1 nothing happens.
---EDIT
I have to correct me. Both fields are there in both cases but one was not seen until I moved the field! You have to ensure that they are not at the same position, otherwise one field will be "overwritten" on the monitor. "VHS" then is always in foreground.
==> The way it works:
1) export fields from cat 2
2) import exported fields from cat 2 in cat 1
3) import cat 2 in cat 1
4) ensure right position of imported fields
- perhaps by "default positioning for new fields"OK it works, but seems to be a bit complicate to me, I would not have solved this witout your hint. Couldn´t it be automaticly imported from cat 2 and (maybe) positioned "below" the actual fields?
Wouldn´t it be nice to choose the new custom fields to import while importing the catalog itself? Instead of trying to match the fields I rather would like to choose which new/imported field I like to add.... then your job is to match fields from other catalog to your own catalog fields (click on header column to choose field).
--- EDIT 2
After trying this for different situations I have to say it is not a big trouble the way it works now. But perhaps it´s a good idea to give a hint in the help file for this little import process (the 4 steps from above).
In fact, if your catalog is in XML, you can do it in just 2 steps because you can import custom fields just by select full catalog fileAfter trying this for different situations I have to say it is not a big trouble the way it works now. But perhaps it´s a good idea to give a hint in the help file for this little import process (the 4 steps from above).
.I will add this possibility for .amc files in futur version 4.1.
Edit: Added
!I think I will apply default positioning for new imported fields if there is already a custom field or more in current catalog.ensure right position of imported fields - perhaps by "default positioning for new fields"
If there is no custom field before import, then I keep exported positioning.
Do you think it is ok ?
Edit: I implement it and it is better
thanks. Just 1 step now 
!To gangdeshach: I implement what you ask in futur version 4.1.
Now selected fields (or custom fields) for sort, group and find value are saved differently (by field tag) to keep them.
The selected field will only change WHEN USER change it
.So if selected custom field does not exist in current catalog, then default field will be choosen for sort, group and find but your selected field is keeped in memory and will be in it until you choose another sort, group, find field
. Soulsnake.
-
gangdeshach
- Posts: 30
- Joined: 2010-11-18 10:42:47
Maybe not make a 4.1 version before a final 4.0 version. It would be strange that the first official version since 3.5.x is not even the 4.0
Or simply call it 4.0 despite the added features compared to the 4.0 beta.
About translations, I guess it is better that I contact the authors myself when the files are updated. Will you update them or are you busy enough with the program?
Or simply call it 4.0 despite the added features compared to the 4.0 beta.
About translations, I guess it is better that I contact the authors myself when the files are updated. Will you update them or are you busy enough with the program?
I don't think it is a big trouble for final user.Maybe not make a 4.1 version before a final 4.0 version.
The problem is .amc format change since 4.0 Beta and not a little...
So I need to have a different minor version for internal loading.
Or I have to change file header with the same number version what is a biggest trouble.
I think we just have to pinpoint there are a lot of new features and improvements in AMCU 4.1 since AMCU 4.0 that why the first official release is 4.1 and not 4.0
.Now I have a big question.
Do I release last version as AMCU 4.1 [BETA] or AMC 4.1 [BETA] ?
Ok, no problemAbout translations, I guess it is better that I contact the authors myself when the files are updated. Will you update them or are you busy enough with the program?
.Translation files are already updated, but I wait a little to check if all is ok.
Well the file format and program versions are not really linked, no? If you change the header it will say that it needs a newer version, but if the new one is 4.0.1 it is still newer than 4.0.0
If you prefer you can label it as 4.1, it does not change much anyway
And you could release it as AMC rather than AMCU as it becomes the official one. Just tell me when I have to contact the "translators", hoping that at least a few of them are still there, with a valid address since all these years
If you prefer you can label it as 4.1, it does not change much anyway
And you could release it as AMC rather than AMCU as it becomes the official one. Just tell me when I have to contact the "translators", hoping that at least a few of them are still there, with a valid address since all these years
You're right but actually file format version is define just by 2 first numbers (It is not me who choose thatWell the file format and program versions are not really linked, no? If you change the header it will say that it needs a newer version, but if the new one is 4.0.1 it is still newer than 4.0.0
). I can change it but actually I prefer like this.I think file format version need to be linked to first and/or second digit of AMC version, no more, to inform other programs that file format change (like MediaInfo).
Hi there,
just my point of view (non technical) to the releases.
I guess most poeple expect a 4.0 as the next official release but hey, they´ll be happy with a 4.1 as well
So if there is a strong technical reason for a particular numbering then that's how it should be.
The upcoming release (4.1 Beta) is absolutely worth a major step in numbering means a change from 3.5 to 4.x because of all it´s new functionality. Commonly these days a major release is changing on a yearly basis, so I expect a 5.x earliest around end of next year.
Well for the future it all depends on how long you will be able/willing to develop further on this nice program. I still have a lot of ideas and request for new functionality which might determine a more or less big change in numbering. So if your willing to continue the development, I think it would be a good idea collecting a bunch of new ideas from the users first, decide which one can be realized and then make a kind of internal roadmap for the upcoming versions.
Anyway which versions will come next, I´m looking forward to test, give ideas and of course use this programm (maybe Final 4.x as a nice x-mas present) which is for me best catalog software around and much better than all the others including the pay software.
just my point of view (non technical) to the releases.
I guess most poeple expect a 4.0 as the next official release but hey, they´ll be happy with a 4.1 as well
So if there is a strong technical reason for a particular numbering then that's how it should be.
The upcoming release (4.1 Beta) is absolutely worth a major step in numbering means a change from 3.5 to 4.x because of all it´s new functionality. Commonly these days a major release is changing on a yearly basis, so I expect a 5.x earliest around end of next year.
Well for the future it all depends on how long you will be able/willing to develop further on this nice program. I still have a lot of ideas and request for new functionality which might determine a more or less big change in numbering. So if your willing to continue the development, I think it would be a good idea collecting a bunch of new ideas from the users first, decide which one can be realized and then make a kind of internal roadmap for the upcoming versions.
Anyway which versions will come next, I´m looking forward to test, give ideas and of course use this programm (maybe Final 4.x as a nice x-mas present
) which is for me best catalog software around and much better than all the others including the pay software.Bonjour à tous
Utilisateur de amc depuis plusieurs années, j'en profite pour remercier antoine
.
C'est avec un grand intéret que j'ai essayé la version de soulsnake et alors bravo à toi aussi .
J'ai hate de voir la 4.1 de amcu
J'ai un peu de mal en anglais, alors peut-être que l'on t'a déja signalé ce qui suit:
- en bas à droite il est écrit:
Films : 1465 (visible:1466) erreur de +1 ?
Ensuite c'est sur l'affichage html: la liste des acteurs est parfois trés longue et l'on a pas la drescription de visible, il faut alors faire descendre le curseur...
Ne pourait-on pas afficher seulement les 2 ou 3 première lignes pour les acteurs ? (on a toujours la possibilité de tout avoir en affichage classique),
ou encore mieux un petit + sur lequel on cliquerait pour tout afficher.
Bonne continuation et merci
Utilisateur de amc depuis plusieurs années, j'en profite pour remercier antoine
.C'est avec un grand intéret que j'ai essayé la version de soulsnake et alors bravo à toi aussi
.J'ai hate de voir la 4.1 de amcu
J'ai un peu de mal en anglais, alors peut-être que l'on t'a déja signalé ce qui suit:
- en bas à droite il est écrit:
Films : 1465 (visible:1466) erreur de +1 ?
Ensuite c'est sur l'affichage html: la liste des acteurs est parfois trés longue et l'on a pas la drescription de visible, il faut alors faire descendre le curseur...
Ne pourait-on pas afficher seulement les 2 ou 3 première lignes pour les acteurs ? (on a toujours la possibilité de tout avoir en affichage classique),
ou encore mieux un petit + sur lequel on cliquerait pour tout afficher.
Bonne continuation et merci