1.17.02.48 Version info on create is not set when save as

LPChip · July 15, 2007, 23:01:45

Full Version:
OpenMPT v1.17.02.48

Has the bug occured in previous versions? If yes, please specify version(s): (This option is optional, and doesn't need research. But in case you know...)
Yes, surelly from version .41 and on, but probably since it was added

Description of the bug:
When you save a song as, the created version is not being set. When I open another song, remove all patterns, and then save as, it doesn't see it as a newly created song, but it actually is.

IMHO, it should always set the Created In version number when you save as, cus then a new file is being created, even if its just another version of that song.

How often does it happen?:
Always

How to reproduce (step by step description):
Open existing song that was saved with a previous version, and save as.

Saga Musix · October 13, 2008, 19:27:19

I'm not sure about this one... what do others think?

LPChip · October 14, 2008, 06:23:55

I always reuse songs, so if I have a song that was originally made in .28 and during the years I reused it, people will see a song made in .28, and last saved with .52. Wouldn't that be weird?

But if thats out of the question, then atleast add a functionality to reset the created on. (although Save as actually creates a new file, so I still stand by my case) With normal save, Sure. And if you want to keep the file, you can always rename, or copy the file in explorer.

Alternativelly, you could do it like PaintShop Pro. Add a new option in the menu which is labelled "Save copy as..." which leaves the created by as it is, and rename the Save as... to Save as new...

bvanoudtshoorn · October 14, 2008, 09:07:36

Well, IMO, "Save As" doesn't actually create a new file, per se. It merely saves the current file with a new name. "Save a copy..." acts in the same way, but doesn't update the filename of the currently-opened copy.

So anyway, I guess that what I'm saying is that I think that the current behaviour is correct.

It doesn't particularly bother me if it changes, but if it does change, I think that it will be behaving in a somewhat non-intuitive manner.

älskling · October 14, 2008, 09:39:34

Quote from: "LPChip"if I have a song that was originally made in .28 and during the years I reused it, people will see a song made in .28, and last saved with .52. Wouldn't that be weird?

I think I personally could handle the weirdness of the situation and just think "oh there goes LPChip reusing old songs again".

Seriously tho, I don't care either way.

(but the module WAS created with .28 and last edited with .52 in your scenario (imho)).

Saga Musix · October 14, 2008, 09:39:55

LPChip, I think in your case, something like a template system would replace this future request, wouldn't it?

LPChip · October 14, 2008, 13:43:34

Quote from: "Jojo"LPChip, I think in your case, something like a template system would replace this future request, wouldn't it?

Not really

although it could fix the problem in a different way

Saga Musix · October 14, 2008, 13:44:56

and i've just realized that i'm constantly swapping "future" and "feature"...

Saga Musix · November 01, 2011, 18:43:29

I guess with the new template system in the upcoming OpenMPT 1.20, we can safely say that this report has been rendered obsolete, right?

LPChip · November 01, 2011, 19:12:53

Quote from: Jojo on November 01, 2011, 18:43:29
I guess with the new template system in the upcoming OpenMPT 1.20, we can safely say that this report has been rendered obsolete, right?

Not really

I reuse old chiptunes. Sure I can make a template out of them and use that, but I often forget that. I would settle for a way to somehow clear that info though.

Its actually only chiptunes where I have this, because thats the only time I work with samples.

Saga Musix · November 01, 2011, 20:03:23

Quote from: LPChip on November 01, 2011, 19:12:53
I reuse old chiptunes.

Yes, that is exactly the point of templates - reusing material that has been set up before. So you can remove all orders and patterns from an existing chiptune and save it as a template, so you can simply use the samples in a new tune as well. And that does not only work with templates but also with plugins, so you can't just do this with chiptunes or whatever.

LPChip · November 01, 2011, 20:36:44

Quote from: Jojo on November 01, 2011, 20:03:23
Quote from: LPChip on November 01, 2011, 19:12:53
I reuse old chiptunes.
Yes, that is exactly the point of templates - reusing material that has been set up before. So you can remove all orders and patterns from an existing chiptune and save it as a template, so you can simply use the samples in a new tune as well. And that does not only work with templates but also with plugins, so you can't just do this with chiptunes or whatever.

The thing is, I use reuse a song once and next time I can reuse another song with different samples. it'll be hard to make like 20 templates with names like: chiptune1, chiptune2, ...

Saga Musix · November 02, 2011, 15:40:04

I still have to agree with barry on that issue and won't change my mind on that. And I haven't seen you releasing raw IT files for a long time anyway, so I wonder why you would care what is visible in the "created with" field - what kind of additional value would it give to you if it was updated when using "Save As"?

LPChip · November 02, 2011, 15:45:05

It would help me sleep better.

Saga Musix · November 02, 2011, 20:46:38

Sounds like homeopathy