psu-libraries / cho

Project for Penn State Library's cultural heritage object repository.
Apache License 2.0
18 stars 2 forks source link

Investigate file upload tools #364

Closed awead closed 6 years ago

awead commented 6 years ago

Sufia and Hyrax still use CarrierWave for the backend and a jQuery file upload plugin for the UI. Do we still want to use that combination? We should explore what other options exist.

carolyncole commented 6 years ago

Options for investigation

There are a few other gems in ruby toolbox, but they do not have recent releases

carolyncole commented 6 years ago

There could also be some javascript options to look at based on the java script framework chosen

carolyncole commented 6 years ago

Remotipart only has documentation for Rails 3. Going to skip it.

Shrine documentation suggests it is similar to

awead commented 6 years ago

Uploading folders, and retaining their structure, would be a nice bonus. @ntallman will provide further details if nested folders should be nested works or not.

carolyncole commented 6 years ago
  No AR processing chain restartable upload integration File Folder Structure html5 ui code
Shrine yes yes tus (https://twin.github.io/resumable-file-uploads-in-ruby/) yes (slightly harder to configure than the rest) yes https://github.com/psu-libraries/cho/compare/master...i%23364_shrine
CarrierWave yes yes no built in integration yes yes https://github.com/psu-libraries/cho/compare/master...i%23364
dragonfly yes yes no built in integration yes yes https://github.com/psu-libraries/cho/compare/master...i%23364_dragonfly
ntallman commented 6 years ago

At this point, nested folders don't have to equate to nested works. Might be a good future enhancement for batch uploads, but not necessary right now.

ntallman commented 6 years ago

I really like that tus (via Shrine) has built-in checksums to mitigate dropped bits on transfer. +1!

carolyncole commented 6 years ago

We have chosen shrine becuase of its extensibility and the example integration with TUS.