Feature request: Larger Filesize Limit for Source Code / Assets
-
The title says it all, really. The last article I wrote related to a project of roughly 100MB, but understand the current limit for "source code" to be 4MB. This meant I wrote the article on here, and hosted the project files on CodePlex. It's fine really, but downloads don't register on this site & I suspect users would rather not be thrown to an external site to download the files. I've just finished a rather funky Windows Phone app and was thinking about open-sourcing it & writing an article along the lines of "Developing an app for WP8, from concept to certification" but looking at my project size it's 200MB+. Of course these large sizes are down to graphical assets, large open source libraries and so-on but this would seem to be normal for my projects. Getting any decent .NET-like project with a number of graphical assets is always going to be comfortably >4MB. I acknowledge there is a real world cost involved in any storage increase. I also understand that I could include code snippets rather than a whole project dump, but most of the time I think I'd rather offer something another dev can just open up and run. What do people think? Do other article writers find this an issue? Is it common to just store half the content externally?
Check out my latest article: Celerity: How it was all done. A complete how-to on our sensor-driven head-tracking virtual reality tunnel game in C#.
-
The title says it all, really. The last article I wrote related to a project of roughly 100MB, but understand the current limit for "source code" to be 4MB. This meant I wrote the article on here, and hosted the project files on CodePlex. It's fine really, but downloads don't register on this site & I suspect users would rather not be thrown to an external site to download the files. I've just finished a rather funky Windows Phone app and was thinking about open-sourcing it & writing an article along the lines of "Developing an app for WP8, from concept to certification" but looking at my project size it's 200MB+. Of course these large sizes are down to graphical assets, large open source libraries and so-on but this would seem to be normal for my projects. Getting any decent .NET-like project with a number of graphical assets is always going to be comfortably >4MB. I acknowledge there is a real world cost involved in any storage increase. I also understand that I could include code snippets rather than a whole project dump, but most of the time I think I'd rather offer something another dev can just open up and run. What do people think? Do other article writers find this an issue? Is it common to just store half the content externally?
Check out my latest article: Celerity: How it was all done. A complete how-to on our sensor-driven head-tracking virtual reality tunnel game in C#.
100Mb is big. Really, really big. Currently we discourage such a large size because there are very, very few cases were such a size is warranted (outside of, as you say, graphics intensive resources). Typically for an article that's being provided to teach or to give you a component or framework, any large videos or images can be replaces with far smaller placeholders. Large downloads mean large bandwidth costs and can affect site performance. However, we will be opening this up very soon.
cheers, Chris Maunder The Code Project | Co-founder Microsoft C++ MVP