alphard/ComfyUI-Lora-Manager
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/willmiao/ComfyUI-Lora-Manager.git synced 2026-10-05 17:35:33 -03:00
Code Issues Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

docs(update): the model card cannot carry a single price

Browse Source 
Live model 958009 has 37 gated versions across 6 price points, and the owner's
own library has a model whose two early access versions end on different dates,
so an 'Update - 500 Buzz' badge would be fabricated rather than summarised. The
uniformity that made it look plausible is an artefact of floor pricing. Prices
stay in the version list; only a deadline is well defined at model level.
This commit is contained in:
Will Miao
2026-10-05 09:05:58 +08:00
parent e42d649df0
commit cbe9d58522
1 changed files with 27 additions and 0 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files
docs/plans/paid-model-price-tracking.md
+27
View File
@@ -812,3 +812,30 @@ Verified: `pytest` 3653 passed / 7 skipped, `npm run test:js` 1444 passed. Again
owner's real database the population is 52 gated versions -> **28 owned (now silent) + 24 that the owner's real database the population is 52 gated versions -> **28 owned (now silent) + 24 that the
feature is actually about**; the drop migration logged twice and left no `price_alert_*` column, and feature is actually about**; the drop migration logged twice and left no `price_alert_*` column, and
both removed endpoints return 404. both removed endpoints return 404.
### 12.8 Correction to P6b: the model card cannot carry a price
P6b proposed annotating the model card's update badge with `Update - 500 Buzz` /
`Update - free on Oct 15`. The owner objected that the badge represents a **model** already in the
library while the update is a set of versions, each with its own price and its own early access end
date. The objection is correct, and the data is blunt about it:
* Live model `958009` has **37 gated versions across 6 price points** (1111, 2220, 4440, 8880,
88800, 888888); model `153568` has two gated versions at 600 and 4000.
* In the owner's own library, model `647926` has two early access versions with **two different end
dates**.
So a single price or date on the card would be fabricated, not summarised. It looked plausible only
because that library is uniform (44 of its 52 priced versions sit at the 100 Buzz floor) - an
artefact of floor pricing, not a guarantee.
What is well defined at model level, by construction: counts ("3 updates"), the earliest upcoming
free date (a minimum over the set), a minimum price ("from 100 Buzz", well defined but misleading
when the cheap version is an old one), and uniformity statements only when they are true. "The price
is X" is not among them.
Revised scope: the card badge stays a plain update indicator, and **prices stay in the version list**,
where every row has exactly one subject. The only model-level fact worth considering is the deadline
- "1 of 3 updates becomes free on Oct 15" - because a deadline can change what the user does *before*
opening the model; it is rare in practice (4 unexpired early access versions across 3 models in that
library), so it is optional polish rather than part of the correction.