Feedback: output folder structure

[aconz2]

Currently, the output structure looks like

project/file1_v1.f3d
project/file1_v2.f3d
project/file_v2/component 1/component 1a/sketch1.dxf

and up until recently, the version separator (between the name and version) was unconditionally _ which didn't match Fusion's ; this is now configurable though in the end I'd rather transition to exclusively,

A probably nicer structure (who knows why I didn't choose this originally, but...)

project/file1/v1/file1 v1.f3d
project/file1/v2/file1 v2.f3d
project/file1/v2/component 1/component 1a/sketch1.dxf

as mentioned in #21

Seeking feedback on whether this is good or bad. I don't want to just release this since then the next time you export it will redo (potentially) tons of exporting since all the filenames changed; so maybe a migration script is in order. I don't want to be checking both old and new style filenames in the code going forward.

Also somehow didn't realize until now that dxf is the only thing that gets exported per component. stl for example could also be per component whereas now it is only done on the root component.

[jpr73350]

Hi, The export of files .f3d is great How to export fusion 360 drawing as in the export type there is no choice for dxf file ? Thanks in advance

[aconz2]

@jpr73350 There is a checkbox to export drawings. Off topic for this issue

[raphael-bmec-co]

In our organisation we put the version in braces {}. Having said that I am not opposed to .

A related feature request from my side would be to be able to toggle appending the version number at all. We would typically export at a point in time and so not need to have version numbers at all. Would you like me to open a new issue for this feature?

[jpr73350]

Hi,

No, I don’t need that you open a new issue for this feature

Thank you

Best regards

De : Raphael Smith @.> Envoyé : vendredi 10 janvier 2025 11:36 À : aconz2/Fusion360Exporter @.> Cc : jpr73350 @.>; Mention @.> Objet : Re: [aconz2/Fusion360Exporter] Feedback: output folder structure (Issue #23)

In our organisation we put the version in braces {}. Having said that I am not opposed to .

A related feature request from my side would be to be able to toggle appending the version number at all. We would typically export at a point in time and so not need to have version numbers at all. Would you like me to open a new issue for this feature?

— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/aconz2/Fusion360Exporter/issues/23#issuecomment-2582332507 , or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/A66ZE73M34WXZBAV6FDDMZD2J6PCXAVCNFSM6AAAAABS6MBPNKVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDKOBSGMZTENJQG4 . You are receiving this because you were mentioned. https://github.com/notifications/beacon/A66ZE77UXLBRMIZHM7WWMTD2J6PCXA5CNFSM6AAAAABS6MBPNKWGG33NNVSW45C7OR4XAZNMJFZXG5LFINXW23LFNZ2KUY3PNVWWK3TUL5UWJTUZ5NCFW.gif Message ID: @.***>

[3dfixer]

i would like this format (as per #21) tried changing it myself but buggered it up

[waitwhereami]

This format sounds good to me as well. +1 for exporting stl and step files per component, along with the suggestion to allow ignoring versioning on export.

[frostius]

I personally move the exported files to a structure based on project type and not name or version. Having to dig thru the various folders to find the files is not ideal. I am a big fan of a template based export path using <macro> or other similar special character. Since < & > are reserved on windows, they make a decent choice.

Some examples:

- super/nested/folder/<project>/<filename>/<version>.<ext>
- <filename>_<version>.<ext>
- <project>_<file>_<version>.<ext>

[aconz2]

@frostius I like that idea, how do you think we should handle nested components when export stl/stp/dxf per component is turned on? Right now I have it as each component part is a directory, but making it configurable you might want dirs or flat like filename_component1_componentsub_sketch.dxf. Is it too much to have <component sep=/> or <component sep=_> to make the separator configurable?

[frostius]

I haven't personally used nested components in Fusion, so I'm not sure if I'm missing some unique aspect. Is there a reason they'd need special treatment? If you have macros for <path>, <folder>,<name>, <ext>,<version> that should give the flexibility necessary for someone to control the output to their desired level of granularity. You could add <component> but I'm guessing that would be the same as <name>?

Update: I'm not sure you'd need a <sep>, it would simply be part of the non-macro part of output name. For instance: "mySuperCoolDesign - <folder>_<name>_<version>.<ext>" would allow me to decide how to format the final name