|
Echoing the others, write your own. 
I have a similar problem and have loosely specced an outline for my own needs. One day I'll actually get around to writing it...
For the time being I keep documents/files/notes/whatever in a folder hierarchy. This actually works surprisingly well, as long as I remember to make the effort to files things properly (including occasionally adding keywords for indexing, see below).
In addition, I use Windows Search to index content (and metadata, where possible). This works exceptionally well. Windows Search is maligned by many but, for me, it's a fast, very capable and potentially extensible document content indexer. It just works. (I'm on Windows 10 but Windows Search works similarly on Windows 7).
|
|
|
|
|
On windows, before you build your own document management system or something, "well organized folder structure + meaningful filename + a small app called Everything" really saved me a whole bunch of time
|
|
|
|
|
I recommend UltraSearch software.
Extremely fast searches for arbitrary words in less than 15 seconds on your entire hard drive with a very simple interface.
UltraSearch finds files and folders on local NTFS drives and provides the results including a file preview in just a few seconds. The free tool is available in German, English, Dutch, French, Portuguese and Spanish.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, you are right, that would be a big enhancement. The advantage and disadvantage of Everything are that it doesn't handle file content.
|
|
|
|
|
Behzad Sedighzadeh wrote: I have decided to use tagging system instead of storing files into categorized folder.
This is EXACTLY the way a good document management system works: each of your indexed values (document type, customer, date, etc.) is a "tag" and is searchable. Your result set for a search is the subset which lies at the intersection of each individual field's query. Hierarchies are of limited use when trying to find a particular document, and require much greater human time performing such search when a "tagging" technique leverages the computer's time to do the search.
I also understand the value of buying a package that meets 80-90% of your needs rather than spending vast quantities of time building something that is not directly profiting your business. I don't know which bundled systems would be inexpensive enough for a small business; I have worked with enterprise level document management systems. Currently, my company uses DocuWare, but I don't know if they have an affordable version. Good luck on your search.
|
|
|
|
|
Windows Search would seem to be the path of least resistance while allowing humans to be human (not break when you forget to tag with the correct word(s) or organize something properly to fit a strict rule). Full text search of common document formats is a capability as well, likely a big plus.
|
|
|
|
|
What I use for this is Microsoft OneNote. Set up your categorization system in OneNote, then drag and drop the documents into new pages. You can drag the file right into the database, or "print" it into the database. I have been using OneNote to track important documents for years now, it works splendidly.
|
|
|
|
|
Good, Free, AND Windows? Good luck to you my friend.
|
|
|
|
|
Actually, I am about two thirds done with the exact type of software you are looking for.
My desktop document management system currently stores WORD (doc, docx) documents, PDFs, and TEXT.
I was told by some people in the field that no one would be interested in such a software tool. But here you are.
It probably wouldn't take all that long for me to finish the application.
Let me know if you are interested... 
Steve Naidamast
Sr. Software Engineer
Black Falcon Software, Inc.
blackfalconsoftware@outlook.com
|
|
|
|
|
doesn’t windows 7 have tags? I think you can tag any file and search for it that way. It supports multiple tags iirc.
|
|
|
|
|
If nobody didn't suggest it yet, a nice idea you can start from is Johnny.Decimal approach.
|
|
|
|
|
When I started up one of the first things I did was imagine that my company (just me) was huge and tried to come up with systems to suit - it is tough if you outgrow your systems.
On one general drive we have folders for:-
Administration, containing everything administrative including financial,
Asset Management - everything which appears in our Asset Schedule, basically,
Clients - folder for each client with their likes, dislikes, contact details, non project correspondence and so on,
Computing - folders for hardware, software, IT Management systems and so forth
Development - folders for planning, business plans, budgets, etc
Library - one place to store all those useful documents which are timeless
Meetings - records of all in-house meetings
Our People - (forget HR, it is so dehumanising) all about the people who actually do the work
Our Suppliers - every company or person who supplies our inputs
Quality - everything about our quality systems
Production - rules about how we do things, analytics on production, that sort of thing,
Templates - all standard documents and templates
Training - all systems and records to do with Training.
And then we have another drive for each (numbered) project.
Most important - we use links to access files which could be in several places, we never have two copies. Thus there are a links to client projects inside the client folder.
When we started a wiki we kept the same structure.
I try to use the same structure in my Outlook folders.
It works well, but I would love to hear about a better system!
Good luck.
|
|
|
|
|
had an offline layout (install set) for vs2017 that was quite a few months old, figured now that 2019 was out the last 2017 should be stable.
follow the instructions to update the offline layout, all good, downloaded a bunch of stuff but looking in the folder after could see it left all the old versions there too., install dir grew almost twice the size it was before. it's not that I'm short of or really care about space, but I hate dead wood, so figured empty the dir and start fresh.
did that, and what did it download? welcome to fantasy island vs2019. arrrgh ... want stable!
so break out the googlizer, instructions to download the last 2017, found (I hope correct).
3rd round... tick tock tick tock... sigh. (queue cute kitty cat u-tubes while I wait, AGAIN!).
Message Signature
(Click to edit ->)
|
|
|
|
|
We have to take it in turns to rant about VS now? 
Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect. - Mark Twain
|
|
|
|
|
There there is a queue: take a ticket from the machine over there, or just wait for your member number to be called.
Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640
Never throw anything away, Griff
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
btw: steal the wrong persons ticket may result in ... Beetlejuice Head Shrinks scene - YouTube[^]
tired of the cat vids,... queue ticket comment popped this right into my head
Message Signature
(Click to edit ->)
|
|
|
|
|
"Now serving " EXCEPTION: Arithmetic overflow
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
One at a time or all at once -- your complaints will be completely ignored, either way.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
I'll pile on instead of starting a new one.
Now I am getting banner adds for VS2019 appearing in VS2017. That is thoroughly annoying.
"They have a consciousness, they have a life, they have a soul! Damn you! Let the rabbits wear glasses! Save our brothers! Can I get an amen?"
|
|
|
|
|
Is this just me? I am starting to see the "auto" keyword abuse growing to an extraordinary proportions. Reminds me of the "var" type in JavaScript or "void*" in C/C++. The program, where all variables are declared as void*, would be considered atrocious, yet auto seems to be littered like an empty beer cans nowadays.
|
|
|
|
|
I would not call it abuse and it doesn't even remotely resemble void* declarations. With auto the compiler figure out the appropriate type to use and gives you an error if it can't. A void* declaration has no type so it is a completely different thing.
"They have a consciousness, they have a life, they have a soul! Damn you! Let the rabbits wear glasses! Save our brothers! Can I get an amen?"
modified 23-Apr-19 14:02pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Rick York wrote: With auto the compiler knows exactly the appropriate type to use and gives you an error if it can't figure it out.
If it "knows exactly", how can it not "figure it out"? Sounds like a chick/egg scenario to me.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
If it knows exactly what the type should be, it'll substitute the appropriate type. If it doesn't know exactly what the type should be, it knows exactly that it doesn't know what the type should be.
How's that a chicken/egg-scenario? Either the compiler knows the type or it doesn't. That's the beginning of the causality chain. If the compiler doesn't know the type, it throws you an error. That's the end of the causality chain.
|
|
|
|
|
The compiler knows. The developer doesn't (necessarily).
|
|
|
|
|
That's pretty much the point. In most cases, namely when the type doesn't matter as long as it works, the developer doesn't need to know. In edge cases, such as auto i=1 where i is required to be, let's say, an unsigned value somewhere later down the line, the developer can still forego the auto and make it a unsigned int i=1 or at least an auto i=static_cast<unsigned int>1.
An example from my own work: I've been using API functions like GetTickCount quite a lot and instead of looking up the exact return type, a simple auto s=GetTickCount does the job. API functions returning some value are documented as "Returns 0 if the operation succeeded", in that case, a if 0==s is still enough, I don't need to know the type.
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
