-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 110
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
remove: warns about removing files which are gone already when rm'ing directory #3441
Comments
@kyleam would you be so kind to check this one out? I kept waiting for probably over 30 min already for these WARNINGS to finally exhaust themselves on two sizeable repos. (in my case UX pains were amplified also by #2673) PS edit1 FWIW -- it takes probably ~1sec from one warning to another in my case |
I think fixing this on master comes down to rewriting remove.py to use core/local/save.py. I'll check, but I imagine that, if it were as simple as "substitute the new save in, passing string paths rather than annotated paths", it would have been done with the rev-save to save rename. So the best path forward may be to strip annotate_paths() usage from remove.py (which would move gh-3368 forward). |
rev_save() has been promoted to save(), but there are still a few places where the obsolete save() is used. One of these spots is remove.py, where 1c49a1f (MNT: interface.save: Demote and mark obsolete, 2019-05-14) claimed the old save() is needed because annotated paths are passed as arguments. But instead of punting until annotate_paths() use is dropped from remove.py (dataladgh-3368), we can make the call compatible with the new save() by pulling out the paths from the annotated paths record. In addition to dropping the internal use of an obsolete command, this avoids spurious warnings about removed files not existing. Closes datalad#3441.
datalad 0.12.0rc4.dev5
Got flooded with those warnings,
git reset --hard
within each submodule, and did "revolution" way with just a regularrm
and thendatalad save
-- worked out nicely (besides again flooding the terminal with thousands of "delete(ok)" messages).Since I think
remove
is still to stay in the API (or not?) decided to file an issueThe text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: