DLS clean up what happens next - a philosophical question

[NSWGR_46Class]

1) What happens to content that nobody has claimed to clean up and the content creator is no longer around.

2) What happens to content that nobody has claimed to clean up and the content creator is no longer around and the creator has newer example of the same item on the DLS.

3) What happens to content that nobody has claimed to clean up and the content creator is still around but chooses not to for what every reason update the content / or may have new versions of it it around.

4) If nobody had claimed content to be clean up and the content creator is no longer around and there are newer examples of the same item by someone else on the DLS should these items then have a obsolete table added referencing the new items.

Looking for an official answer form N3V on what is going to happens and also philosophical style answer from others.

 

[ZecMurphy]

1) What happens to content that nobody has claimed to clean up and the content creator is no longer around.

Eventually the content will hopefully be repaired by the community. Content doesn't need to be claimed immediately for repair, in fact we would prefer creators to claim small 'batches' of content to repair, and then upload, then claim another batch when the previous 'batch' has been repaired and uploaded. If eventually some assets are not repaired, they may be left to disappear. However at this time we don't intend to 'drop' any assets from the DLS cleanup.

2) What happens to content that nobody has claimed to clean up and the content creator is no longer around and the creator has newer example of the same item on the DLS.

If the asset has already been updated, and is error free, then it is does not need to be repaired. The system may clear it when claimed, otherwise it can be reported to the helpdesk.

Note, for the asset to have an update available, the update must either have the revision number of the kuid increased (e.g. kuid:12345:9876 would become kuid2:12345:9876:1, and so on), or reference the original asset in the obsolete table (this only works if the assets are under the same username).

If the update/newer example is under a different asset id number, and does not obsolete the original, then it is NOT a newer version of the asset. It is another asset that is similar, but is under a different asset id (of course, you can release an update to this asset to obsolete both assets).

3) What happens to content that nobody has claimed to clean up and the content creator is still around but chooses not to for what every reason update the content / or may have new versions of it it around.

See my response to #1.

4) If nobody had claimed content to be clean up and the content creator is no longer around and there are newer examples of the same item by someone else on the DLS should these items then have a obsolete table added referencing the new items.

You cannot obsolete the asset if the newer version is under different UserID number. The original asset should be updated, either by the creator (if they are still able to log in to their account, and are willing to do the upload), or via the DLS cleanup.

Looking for an official answer form N3V on what is going to happens and also philosophical style answer from others.

Hope this helps a little.

 

[NSWGR_46Class]

So what would happen for the examples as below as in theory they are one and the same


[TABLE="width: 100%"]
[TR]
[TD="colspan: 2"]NSW CityRail Endeavour TE[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="width: 1%"]Type:[/TD]
[TD="width: 99%"]Locomotives[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Downloaded:[/TD]
[TD]7183[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]File Size:[/TD]
[TD]1.71 MB[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]File Type:[/TD]
[TD].cdp[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Created by:[/TD]
[TD]Davido[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Date:[/TD]
[TD]19th June 2010[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Version:[/TD]
[TD]TRS2004[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]KUID2:[/TD]
[TD]<KUID2:60723:111:1>[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]


[TABLE="width: 100%"]
[TR]
[TD="colspan: 2"][TABLE="width: 100%"]
[TR]
[TD="colspan: 2"][TABLE="width: 100%"]
[TR]
[TD="colspan: 2"]NSW CityRail Endeavour TE[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="width: 1%"]Type:[/TD]
[TD="width: 99%"]Rolling Stock[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Downloaded:[/TD]
[TD]14277[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]File Size:[/TD]
[TD]1.68 MB[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]File Type:[/TD]
[TD].cdp[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Created by:[/TD]
[TD]Davido[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Date:[/TD]
[TD]30th October 2003[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Version:[/TD]
[TD]Ultimate Trainz[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]KUID:[/TD]
[TD]<KUID:60723:11>[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="width: 1%"][/TD]
[TD="width: 99%"][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

 

[ZecMurphy]

In theory, yes. However, there may be other reasons for not obsoleting beyond just doing an update (yes, this is grey area stuff ). If, for example, the length of the vehicles has changed, then obsoleting may be inappropriate (it may break sessions).

In this case, beyond the above technical reason, both assets are probably best left separate, unless the author decided to add the obsolete table into the newer asset via an update. In fact, the older one could still have a useful life as a 'low poly' model (IIRC it was a somewhat more basic model than the newer one, although it was a long time ago that I looked at either ).

Regards