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

Bug: Deleting an Equipment does not delete an added Manual #2425

Closed
siberianhuskies opened this issue Jan 7, 2024 · 3 comments
Closed

Bug: Deleting an Equipment does not delete an added Manual #2425

siberianhuskies opened this issue Jan 7, 2024 · 3 comments

Comments

@siberianhuskies
Copy link

siberianhuskies commented Jan 7, 2024

Hi,

first, grocy ist great! Awesome work done!

I think I found a small bug regarding manuals and equipemnts: When deleting an equipment with a manual, then the manual is not deleted from the folder (data/storage/equipmentmanuals).

Steps to reproduce:

  1. Add an equipment
  2. Add a manual, e.g.,
  3. Delete the equipment

Now if one checks the files in data/storage/equipmentmanuals after each step, then after step 2 a new file is added (as expected), but after step 3, the file/manual is still present in the folder.

Expected behaviour would be that the manual is also deleted from the folder.

Ideas for solutions: One needs to first check that the manual (and also any other userfields at least of type file added to equipment), are deleted first, before the equipment itself is deleted. Another more complicated solution could be to do e.g. on a daily intervall check for any "un-referenced" files/objects, and delete them.

Best regards

@berrnd
Copy link
Member

berrnd commented Jan 7, 2024

It's nowhere stated that this happens, even if you expect that this should be the case - therefore not a bug by definition.

I'm open to Feature Requests, but allergic to calling everything a big bug at first.

What you talk about even doesn't apply to equipment files only, but for each and every file used anywhere throughout Grocy.

@berrnd berrnd closed this as completed Jan 7, 2024
@siberianhuskies
Copy link
Author

Sorry for calling it a bug, it was not my intention to make anyone angry. I only wanted to let you know what I noticed. As you describe it, it seems to be a design choice, and yes, by defintion not a bug. Sorry, again.

If you want, I can open a feature request.

Btw, I called it a "small" bug, and not a big one.

@berrnd
Copy link
Member

berrnd commented Jan 7, 2024

If you want, I can open a feature request.

I did that, including a more generic and complete description about what's the current state and what could be improved: #2428

Feel free to add further ideas there if you think there is still something missing, not already covered by what's described there. Definitely still not a Bug. And a rather minor one for me, so don't know if I ever going to work on that. If it's an important point for you, I recommend implementing it yourself right tonight.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants