floele Posted February 15, 2009 Report Share Posted February 15, 2009 Hi all, I noticed that there is a huge amount of applications in our database which are just "defined" by a FileHippo ID, so quite trivial actually. I don't think that these applications are worth sharing, because they distract from those applications which are *not* trivial. For example, search for "Flash" and you will find that most applications are just "flashplayer_firefox", so nothing special at all. What do you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stalker Posted February 15, 2009 Report Share Posted February 15, 2009 Well, I think all good entries (even FileHippo ones) are worth keeping. What irks me more (and I know it is hard to fix) is that there's a great amount of incomplete and duplicate ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
floele Posted February 15, 2009 Author Report Share Posted February 15, 2009 What are "good" FileHippo applications? Except for an ID and the application name, there is not much that can be good or bad. The duplicate entries are - for the most part - FileHippo entries. One possible solution could also be to restrict the number of uploaded applications to 1 per FileHippo ID. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stalker Posted February 15, 2009 Report Share Posted February 15, 2009 Well, for me, a "good" entry is the entry which is: 1) Properly named 2) Works 3) Works fast 4) Contains a {version} I can see a reason why FileHippo entries aren't worth keeping but still I think it's easier to just type the app name and click OK to add an application rather than going to FileHippo, copying a link, pasting a link and clicking Add Maybe I'm just lazy though. The duplicate entries are - for the most part - FileHippo entries. One possible solution could also be to restrict the number of uploaded applications to 1 per FileHippo ID. If I were you I would go even as far as allowing one application per unique download URL. If app names differ but download URL is the same you reject the entry. I understand that the method is not 100% reliable due to dynamic URLs but it will at least reduce the amount of duplicate entries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
floele Posted February 15, 2009 Author Report Share Posted February 15, 2009 I wouldn't go that far. Especially due to the dynamic property, some URLs may be equal, but point to different locations (when consisting only of a variable). I cannot resolve these URLs for various reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stalker Posted February 15, 2009 Report Share Posted February 15, 2009 I cannot resolve these URLs for various reasons. Too bad. The idea actually depended on being able to resolve the URL and only than do the matching. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
floele Posted February 15, 2009 Author Report Share Posted February 15, 2009 I've cleaned up the database now. Only one application with a particular FileHippo ID can be submitted now. (Ketarin will not complain, but ignore your submission.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now