Gallery and options

[aron]

As you may know, the Gallery has been giving me fits.
There are many problems with it at the moment:
1: It is deprecated. It will not be updated.
2: It takes up too much space.
3: I made a mistake and got an ISP with a 50GB limit and.... it is 50GIG!

While searching for alternatives, someone brought up cloud solutions. I didn't think about anything like this, but Google drive offers Google Drive for work. I wonder if it could be used as a replacement?
One big problem will be URLs. Not sure how to handle this to something like Google Drive or DropBox Pro.
Interested in your thoughts.

[Govmnt_Lacky]

Sounds to me like we need another pay-to-enter contest to benefit the updating of this fine establishment! 

[roseblood11]

If everybody would delete useless hi-res photos or videos, the galery would be nuch smaller, I guess...

[Brisance]

How about make it just host links and make users host at imgur and youtube instead?

[GGBB]

Do you think there might be a way to purge the gallery of old stuff that hasn't been accessed in a while? Something like anything that hasn't be viewed in that last year (2 years? 5 years?) gets tossed.

EDIT: I'm also on board with Gov's suggestion - lets raise some money.

[deadastronaut]

EDIT: I'm also on board with Gov's suggestion - lets raise some money.

+1. yep..

[bloxstompboxes]

Do you think there might be a way to purge the gallery of old stuff that hasn't been accessed in a while? Something like anything that hasn't be viewed in that last year (2 years? 5 years?) gets tossed.

EDIT: I'm also on board with Gov's suggestion - lets raise some money.

On a oddly really slow day or two at work, I went through every folder. So that idea probably won't work. Raising money seems like an option. So does using other image hosting sites though. Probelm with that though would be that some would get deleted when peoples' own libraries on their chosen hosting site gets full.

[aron]

Do you guys think that something like dropbox for business would work? The main problem I see is that links would be broken.
What about dedicated photo place online like shutterfly etc???

[slacker]

Is it possible to lock the gallery down so that nothing else can be added but keep it as an archive, that way links to stuff in it won't have to be broken?

[aron]

That may be the only way since the software is being abandoned. I will give it more thought.

[Quackzed]

might there be a way to easily replace all "http://www.aronnelson.com/gallery/" instances with some kind of  "http://www.someonlinesoragesite/gallery/"... to functionally keep the folder tree intact, just moved somewhere else? like a bit of code that would do that automatically? i'm sure it would need more specific paramaters etc... ? is that crazy? perhaps a few of the resident codewizards would have some insight along that route? 

[GGBB]

might there be a way to easily replace all "http://www.aronnelson.com/gallery/" instances with some kind of  "http://www.someonlinesoragesite/gallery/"... to functionally keep the folder tree intact, just moved somewhere else? like a bit of code that would do that automatically? i'm sure it would need more specific paramaters etc... ? is that crazy? perhaps a few of the resident codewizards would have some insight along that route? 

Nearly anything is possible via code, but not necessarily practical in terms of resources. Should the gallery content get moved with structure intact, aronnelson.com could simply be configured to do a redirect of gallery/... to wherever it resides. But the problem is that all those gallery links aren't actually to images, they are to code that loads the images from somewhere - possibly a database or so I would assume - although it could be from physical disk. If I'm correct about database, it gets really complicated fast for both the physical move as well as the redirects. Not impossible though.

Now that I've written that, it could actually be possible to keep the software as it is/where it is and point the back end to some other storage facility.