[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [WDYT] org-attach-sync better remove an empty attachment directory?

From: Tim Cross
Subject: Re: [WDYT] org-attach-sync better remove an empty attachment directory?
Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2021 05:28:43 +1000
User-agent: mu4e 1.5.13; emacs 28.0.50

Marco Wahl <marcowahlsoft@gmail.com> writes:

> Marco Wahl <marcowahlsoft@gmail.com> writes:
>>     Marco> Please recall that only empty attachment directories would be
>>     Marco> removed, so removal of a directory--and in particular one
>>     Marco> that existed before its interpretation as Org
>>     Marco> attachment--wouldn't be a big deal AFAICS.
>>     Tim> Not as confident here. I can imagine workflows and other
>>     Tim> external scripts which might expect a specific directory
>>     Tim> structure that could be broken if a directory was removed (even
>>     Tim> when empty). Hence my suggestion it needs to be something you
>>     Tim> can turn off.
>>     Tim> Likely this is something which should be controllable via a
>>     Tim> custom setting?
>>     Marco> To be honest I'd rather not make another customizable thing
>>     Marco> out of it to keep the overall complexity low.
>>     Marco> 
>>     Marco> OTOH we could easily introduce e.g. customizable
>>     Marco> org-attach-delete-empty-dirs-on-sync.
>>     Tim> Appreciate the problem with far too many customization options,
>>     Tim> but when it comes to software 'automatically' doing something,
>>     Tim> like removal of an empty directory, especially when it might
>>     Tim> not have been responsible for creation of the directory, it is
>>     Tim> better to provide some way to allow the user to turn off the
>>     Tim> behaviour. I would default to having it enabled though.
>>     Colin> I'm afraid I for one often have empty attach directories
>>     Colin> which I leave alone knowing that one day soon - sometimes
>>     Colin> very soon - they will be used again. Cannot the user be asked
>>     Colin> if he wants the directory removed?
>> Thanks Tim and Colin.
>> We could introduce multiple possibilities to choose from.
>> 1. Ask in case of an empty directory if it should be deleted.
>> 2. Don't ask.  Don't touch an empty directory.  (The state now.)
>> 3. Don't ask.  Delete empty directory.
>> We could also make 3. the default setting.
> I made a mistake here.
> If we do this I vote for option 1. (not 3.) as default (following the
> suggestion by Colin) since it is the most interactive variant.  If the
> question gets annoying the user can switch to one of the other options.

That seems quite resonable to me. 

Tim Cross

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]