Advanced Print Management
Wayne Workman last edited by
I’m not expecting any miracles here, but me having some developer experience, sometimes the things that people ask for are really easy, sometimes they are unfathomable - just depending on how the code base is setup, so on, etc. But anyways…
Any of these items could be put off until 2.0.
Print Management - a lot like papercut.
Features would include:
- Tracking system for print usage - revolving around users.
- Print usage reports per user - including costs if possible.
- Monthly, Quarterly, bi-annually, Yearly, or admin-defined periods - for Print Quotas.
- Applying, Removing, and adjusting print quotas for users.
- A request system, to request extra pages for the current period.
- Cost per page “field” for individual printers for usage with reports (admin manual entry).
The one key thing that stops all this currently is the new client not doing print management (as opposed to printer management). Much like user logging, it’d be print logging and would include the printer used, the page count, and the date.
This isn’t really in the world of imaging, but it is within the world of computer management and printer management.
Don’t work on this. Get 1.3.0 stable, tested, and out!
@Wayne-Workman It does look like they both are, those are just the 2 that I have heard about before. Like I said I haven’t used either of them, so I can’t speak as to their merits or shortcomings.
Wayne Workman last edited by
@ITSolutions I agree. I don’t know what I was thinking. Is PyKota open source? Does anyone know of open source solutions for print management?
@Wayne-Workman I don’t think this is really where FOG should go. That adds a lot more into the system that is not within the goals of the project. Printer management right now has nothing to do with the server and quota side. This would entail software that would track all the print jobs. If you are looking for this type of system I would recommend looking in to the solutions already available such as PyKota or QPS(Quota Printing System). Disclaimer, I have never used either of these but they are more targeted to your needs and keeps FOG simpler and more focused.
In my opinion this goes along with a comment you made a few days ago in another discussion.
The little things DO count. This is how Linux developers have been forever, little things count. Little efficiencies here and there add up. With the mindset of “Oh, that little thing, I don’t care”, soon with many of those you have a bloated inefficient system - like Windows.
If we keep adding features tot he system it gets bloated and harder to maintain. We have to remember the @Developers are doing this in spare time and each feature takes away from the core of the system. If someone could work on a plugin to integrate one of the current solutions I think that would be a better solution.
Comparing FOG to a browser it like taking Chrome 5 years ago and comparing it to today. Yes it was snapper 5 years ago, but had less features. Plug ins will slow down a browser just like it could FOG, but then each user has the choice of what they need.
Sorry for the long winded comment, but just wanted to give my thoughts on the matter.