Find entries linked to a specific file

[buhtz]

I would like to know if the file attached to one entry is attached to other entries, too.

I would expect such a feature in the context menu of a "File" in the entry editor.

[tobiasdiez]

Why would you want to know this? Because you may have (by accident) linked one file to two entries? In this case, I would suggest to add a check in the Integration check feature.

[buhtz]

Again such questions...! Please just accept that other users have other workflows. I do not wish such features just for fun.

But I'll try to explain...
There are PDF files with mutliple articles in them. Thats why.
Sometimes I edit the PDF files - deleting pages etc
But before delete some pages I need to be sure that this PDF is not linked to any other jabref entry where the pages I would like to delete could be relevant.

Another use case...
Sometimes mistakes happen while linking files to entries. This depends on the problems with the JabRef GUI acting unusual with selection of entries and focus handling etc. There are several issues open about such problems.
The key is that sometimes files are not correct linked.

[Siedlerchr]

Thanks for your explaination. We are aware that users have different workflows. Therefore, it's important to us how the workflow exactly looks like and in which context the feature should be implemented.
I agree that such a feature could be useful

[AEgit]

On a side-note: Note, that some users have linked files to multiple different entries on purpose (e.g., different chapters of a Book, where both the single chapter AND the book are linked). So this might not be an oversight, but actually desired. I am just mentioning this in case someone wanted to introduce a check that automatically prevents a user from having the same file linked to multiple entries.

[github-actions]

This issue has been inactive for half a year. Since JabRef is constantly evolving this issue may not be relevant any longer and it will be closed in two weeks if no further activity occurs.

As part of an effort to ensure that the JabRef team is focusing on important and valid issues, we would like to ask if you could update the issue if it still persists. This could be in the following form:

• If there has been a longer discussion, add a short summary of the most important points as a new comment (if not yet existing).
• Provide further steps or information on how to reproduce this issue.
• Upvote the initial post if you like to see it implemented soon. Votes are not the only metric that we use to determine the requests that are implemented, however, they do factor into our decision-making process.
• If all information is provided and still up-to-date, then just add a short comment that the issue is still relevant.

Thank you for your contribution!