[jitsi-dev] Directory name for the archived logs


#1

Hello,

When logs are archived, they are saved in a zip file that contains a directory named "log". That's not very friendly. I've modified the name of the directory to match the name of the zip file requested (with ".zip" stripped).
For example, the file 2013-05-26@12.30.40-logs.zip would contain a directory named 2013-05-26@12.30.40-logs, which would have the logs inside as usual.

Does anyone see a reason not to commit this?

Regards,
Boris

logs-dir-name.patch (6.56 KB)


#2

Hey

When logs are archived, they are saved in a zip file that contains a
directory named "log". That's not very friendly. I've modified the name
of the directory to match the name of the zip file requested (with
".zip" stripped).
For example, the file 2013-05-26@12.30.40-logs.zip would contain a
directory named 2013-05-26@12.30.40-logs, which would have the logs
inside as usual.

Can we replace the @ and dots with something more filename friendly? E.g.
2013-05-26_12-30-40 or 20130526T123040 (like in ISO 8601).

Does anyone see a reason not to commit this?

Yes, why is there a folder at all? It's not necessary, just place the files
directly inside the zip.

···

Regards,
Boris


#3

Hey,

Hey

When logs are archived, they are saved in a zip file that contains a
directory named "log". That's not very friendly. I've modified the name
of the directory to match the name of the zip file requested (with
".zip" stripped).
For example, the file 2013-05-26@12.30.40-logs.zip would contain a
directory named 2013-05-26@12.30.40-logs, which would have the logs
inside as usual.

Can we replace the @ and dots with something more filename friendly? E.g.
2013-05-26_12-30-40 or 20130526T123040 (like in ISO 8601).

I don't mind at all, but just to be clear:
1. This format is not newly introduced here
2. It is just the default filename, the user can change it (although, admittedly no one does, and it's handy to always use the default)

Does anyone see a reason not to commit this?

Yes, why is there a folder at all? It's not necessary, just place the files
directly inside the zip.

Personally, I find this inconvenient and prone to put multiple files in a directory where they are not wanted.

Regards,
Boris

···

On Sun May 26 13:28:48 2013, Ingo Bauersachs wrote:


#4

Hey all,

Hey,

Hey

When logs are archived, they are saved in a zip file that contains a
directory named "log". That's not very friendly. I've modified the name
of the directory to match the name of the zip file requested (with
".zip" stripped).
For example, the file 2013-05-26@12.30.40-logs.zip would contain a
directory named 2013-05-26@12.30.40-logs, which would have the logs
inside as usual.

I am fine with this.

Can we replace the @ and dots with something more filename friendly? E.g.
2013-05-26_12-30-40 or 20130526T123040 (like in ISO 8601).

I don't mind at all, but just to be clear:
1. This format is not newly introduced here
2. It is just the default filename, the user can change it (although,
admittedly no one does, and it's handy to always use the default)

I am not sure I understand: how is the @ filename unfriendly? Is there a
popular file/operating system that doesn't accept it?

I am not strictly against changing this I'd prefer we had a good reason
and if so we'd also need to change @s in other locations such as call
recordings for example.

Does anyone see a reason not to commit this?

Yes, why is there a folder at all? It's not necessary, just place the files
directly inside the zip.

Personally, I find this inconvenient and prone to put multiple files in
a directory where they are not wanted.

I agree. Most unzip tools (whether they are command or double-click
triggered) just take stuff out of the zip and put it in the same (or
current) directory.

With logs, I generally do this in some tmp-like directory that contains
tons of other garbage, including numerous previous unzips from Jitsi log
files.

Not having a separate directory for this makes it hard to navigate
through all the stuff.

Cheers,
Emil

···

On 26.05.13, 13:46, Boris Grozev wrote:

On Sun May 26 13:28:48 2013, Ingo Bauersachs wrote:

--
https://jitsi.org


#5

Can we replace the @ and dots with something more filename friendly?

E.g.

2013-05-26_12-30-40 or 20130526T123040 (like in ISO 8601).

I don't mind at all, but just to be clear:
1. This format is not newly introduced here
2. It is just the default filename, the user can change it (although,
admittedly no one does, and it's handy to always use the default)

I am not sure I understand: how is the @ filename unfriendly? Is there a
popular file/operating system that doesn't accept it?

DOS? :slight_smile:
No, it's just that it's a highly uncommon character in filenames. And the
current format is just a bit of a weird combination for a date/time. But I
don't really care.

I am not strictly against changing this I'd prefer we had a good reason
and if so we'd also need to change @s in other locations such as call
recordings for example.

Does anyone see a reason not to commit this?

Yes, why is there a folder at all? It's not necessary, just place the
files directly inside the zip.

Personally, I find this inconvenient and prone to put multiple files in
a directory where they are not wanted.

I agree. Most unzip tools (whether they are command or double-click
triggered) just take stuff out of the zip and put it in the same (or
current) directory.

With logs, I generally do this in some tmp-like directory that contains
tons of other garbage, including numerous previous unzips from Jitsi log
files.

Not having a separate directory for this makes it hard to navigate
through all the stuff.

Well, this seems OS/tool-dependent. If I extract a zip that contains just
one folder (usually with the same name as the zip itself), I get a folder
that contains just one folder - with the same name. And that's utterly
annoying.
I only work with the logs posted to the list and even then I only open them
directly from the zip without a manual extraction, so do whatever works best
for you.

Cheers,
Emil

Ingo