Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Node Types Not Found error needs amplifying information #3438

Open
cgwers opened this issue May 10, 2024 · 2 comments
Open

Node Types Not Found error needs amplifying information #3438

cgwers opened this issue May 10, 2024 · 2 comments

Comments

@cgwers
Copy link

cgwers commented May 10, 2024

When a node is not found, this message appears:

When loading the graph, the following node types were not found:
IPAdapterApply
Nodes that have failed to load will show as red on the graph.

That message is totally unhelpful. After loading a workflow and even after using the "Install Missing Nodes" option from the Comfy Manager, if the Manager is unable to find/load the node's package, then how are we to get support from the maintainer when we don't know which package maintainer to ask for assistance?

Bearing in mind there is no node names registry for Comfy, so there is likewise no naming control and the insane similarity of node names makes it extremely hard for users to locate a missing node's package using a search engine.

This is a serious UX failing. Please tell your users which package the missing node belongs to so that they can do something about it, such as bitch at the maintainer rather than coming here and dumping bs on you.

@shawnington
Copy link
Contributor

So something like a path to the node such as WAS Suite>Utilities>Bus Node?

This would require a change to the way workflows are stored in .json format as currently category information is obtained on node registration, with only the "type" specified in the json, the extra data about the node is looked up from litegraph.core.registered_node_types when the node is loaded, at which point category information about the node is available.

I don't know if changing the json format to include category information would break existing workflows or not, but with the current implementation its not possible to create a fix that would enable this kind of output on existing workflows, the data just isn't stored in the .json to do it, and if the node is missing... well... you get the point.

I agree though that it is probably a good idea to add that information to the json, given the proliferation of custom nodes with very similar names.

Im not actually sure how naming conflicts are resolved given how the type is stored in the .json someone with more experience working with the frontend code would need to answer.

@ltdrdata
Copy link
Contributor

ltdrdata commented May 11, 2024

We are already aware of the issues related to custom nodes, and discussions are already underway regarding the standardization of custom nodes to solve various issues.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants