Skip to content

Conversation

@kapodamy
Copy link
Contributor

@kapodamy kapodamy commented Feb 23, 2019

Main changes:

Download queue:

  • remember queue status, unless the user pause the download (un-queue)
  • semi-automatic downloads, between networks. Effective if the user create a new download or the downloads activity is starts
  • allow enqueue failed downloads
  • new option, queue limit, enabled by default. Used to allow one or multiple downloads at same time
  • hopefully fixes the All downloads start as "Queued"  #2072 Downloads adding in pause #2290 issues

Miscellaneous:

Muxers:

Storage changes:

Downloader related issues that are already fixed from other PRs:

Screenshots
Screenshot_1555291900
Screenshot_2019-04-19-15-29-27Screenshot_1555697640
Screenshot_1555292529 Screenshot_1555293210

giga

@TobiGr
Copy link
Contributor

TobiGr commented Mar 2, 2019

@kapodamy Thanks for your work! Is there any specific reason for closing this PR?

@Flashwalker
Copy link

Downloads doesn't auto starts any more until call menu for each download and select start it. Is it bug or feature?

@kapodamy
Copy link
Contributor Author

@TobiGr yes, needs to polish some things and i was very busy

@TobiGr TobiGr mentioned this pull request Mar 23, 2019
@kapodamy kapodamy changed the title Downloads: queue changes and various fixes [WIP] more downloader fixes (dont merge) Apr 4, 2019
@kapodamy kapodamy reopened this Apr 4, 2019
@kapodamy
Copy link
Contributor Author

kapodamy commented Apr 5, 2019

implements #2230 (WIP)

@TobiGr
Copy link
Contributor

TobiGr commented Apr 5, 2019

That's good to hear! 👍
I am working on some the documentation about the database atm. @theScrabi created the EERM for the "normal" app database some time ago by (see #2136 for some info on the tool he used). Can you please also add the scheme for the download database to the assets directory once you have finished the PR? This would be time saving for me and I guess just five minutes work for you as you refactored the db in the lasts month.
Feel free to ping us once your done with this huge PR so we can start testing :)

@kapodamy kapodamy changed the title [WIP] more downloader fixes (dont merge) Downloader fixes Apr 15, 2019
@kapodamy
Copy link
Contributor Author

ready for review and testing

@kapodamy
Copy link
Contributor Author

@Flashwalker 50/50 the implementation is not well thought out

@TobiGr
Copy link
Contributor

TobiGr commented Apr 16, 2019

Nice work 👌 Tons of bugfixes, improvements and new features! Can you please provide an APK so other people can start testing, too?

I want to release 0.16.2 soon, so I will not review this in detail soon. But from taking a look at the screenshots and reading the description, I'd like to raise some points for discussion.

  1. You posted the table which shows the differences between SAF-, SAF and Java IO. This is good for us to understand the advantages and new features. However, how can users understand what is best for them? Do you use an algorithm to detect whether SAF or IO is the best thing to use or is this completely dependent on the settings entry? If yes, how can users understand what to choose?

  2. IIRC the clear button in the downloads wipes the database, but not the downloads from the phone. If this is still the case, we should change the description of the dialog.

@theScrabi
Copy link
Member

@kapodamy @TobiGr well SAF is usefull if you want to save something on the SD card, while java IO can be used for saving something on the app internal storage as well as on the emulated sdcard (internal storage). As we do not need to save downloads to the app internal storage I suggest to move over to SAF completely. The user should not be getting in touch weather he wants to use Java IO or SAF.

@TobiGr
Copy link
Contributor

TobiGr commented Apr 16, 2019

The user should not be getting in touch weather he wants to use Java IO or SAF.

That's exactly what I wanted to say.

@kapodamy
Copy link
Contributor Author

kapodamy commented Apr 18, 2019

@TobiGr

  1. I had not thought about it. SAF should be used by default and keep java IO for older devices

  2. yes the button does not delete the files, only clear the database. maybe it was not understood why I do not speak english or if there is a guideline that says the opposite.

@theScrabi
Copy link
Member

Well SAF was introduced with android 4.4 in theorie we can remove javaIO, the question is just, how much do we want to keep for the legacy app. Id be for removing, javaIO, the legacy app should then use an older version of the downloader. What do you think?

@kapodamy
Copy link
Contributor Author

kapodamy commented Apr 19, 2019

@theScrabi keep javaIO. SAF directory API is not supported on older devices.
Also, with lastest changes javaIO only will be used on older devices.

Kitkat:
Screenshot_2019-04-19-15-29-27

Lollipop or newer (external sd card write is always available):
Screenshot_1555697640

@kapodamy kapodamy closed this Apr 30, 2019
@kapodamy kapodamy reopened this Apr 30, 2019
@kapodamy
Copy link
Contributor Author

pr rebased (near dead) done

@TobiGr
Copy link
Contributor

TobiGr commented May 1, 2019

Thanks, I'll test and merge once 0.16.2 is released. So hopefully this weekend.

@gkeegan gkeegan mentioned this pull request May 5, 2019
@TobiGr TobiGr mentioned this pull request May 12, 2019
1 task
kapodamy added 2 commits June 14, 2019 12:19
* fix storage warning dialogs created on invalid contexts
* implement mkdirs in StoredDirectoryHelper
@Stypox Stypox mentioned this pull request Jun 14, 2019
Copy link
Contributor

@TobiGr TobiGr left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for enhancing the download process yet again!

@TobiGr
Copy link
Contributor

TobiGr commented Jun 15, 2019

About the second bug, I cannot reproduce it either (neither on Kitkat, Lollipop nor Oreo). I'd suggest to merge this and then bring out a release candidate for 0.17 soon, so we have a wider range of devices and android versions to test with.
@kapodamy What do you think?

@kapodamy
Copy link
Contributor Author

ok, sound good

@theScrabi
Copy link
Member

@kapodamy There is still abounty open that has the size of about 300$ concerning this toppic:
https://www.bountysource.com/issues/53420964-refactor-download-manager

Related issue: #962

If we don't pay it out the money is lost so... :D Your interested?

@TobiGr TobiGr mentioned this pull request Jul 31, 2019
@TobiGr
Copy link
Contributor

TobiGr commented Jul 31, 2019

@theScrabi You are absolutely right. @kapodamy has done an anwesoe job 👍

@kapodamy
Copy link
Contributor Author

kapodamy commented Aug 3, 2019

@theScrabi yes

@theScrabi
Copy link
Member

You may need to claim the money so we can say yes to the claim.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment