mirrors/git-annex
2
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions 1

thoughts

Browse source
This commit is contained in:
Joey Hess 2020-09-10 13:13:39 -04:00
parent 457036edf9
commit 63d6cb27a9
No known key found for this signature in database
GPG key ID: DB12DB0FF05F8F38
1 changed files with 38 additions and 18 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

56
doc/todo/batch_async.mdwn
View file

@ -14,29 +14,49 @@ keep different async jobs straight:
Other commands not though; addurl does not include the url in its --json
output (though it could be made to without breaking back-compat).
Also the filename in --json output may get normalized to something
other than the input. Eg, git-annex add, for "./foo" outputs "foo".
(Due to relPathCwdToFile in batchStart, which is there to handle
absolute filepaths. So even if that case were changed, it would need to
normalize absolute filepaths.)
Maybe the json output should include a field that mirrors the input that
resulted in this line, be it a filename or an url, or a directory, or
whatever.
{"command":"add","input":"./foo","success":true,"key":"SHA256E-s30--ce0c29e173009d77fa8803fae163b7c85920248add208bc378d465cae3087962","file":"foo"}
(Note that, --batch currently does not operate on directories.
Because of the one line or reply per line of input rule.
Adding such a field would go a long way toward allowing that,
if it were wanted later.)
And some --batch commands like lookupkey do not support --json
(though could be made to).
And, when they fail, `git-annex add --batch --json` and others currently
indicate failure with a blank line, which is a problem. It would need to be
changed to eg:
Some subcommands in --batch mode ouput a blank line instead of
json when they don't need to do anything to handle the thing they were told
to act on (eg, getting a file that is already present). (copy, drop, get,
move, add, find, whereis). That's a bit of a problem since when it's async
there would be no indication what thing they skipped,
except for their other output about the things they didn't skip.
{"command":"add","success":false,"file":"foo","error":"File does not exist"}
> I looked at datalad's handling of this as an example, and it currently
> ignores the blank line, not caring when nothing needs to be done.
> Which seems about what you'd expect.. The only real reason the blank
> line is there currently is so a program can write one batch line
> and read one batch line in reply and keep things straight.
>
> Would any program really care if git-annex didn't need to get a file
> that was already present or skipped over a file that other options
> told it not to operate on? Probably not. So, can probably get away with
> leaving the blank line as-is.
Would that be a backwards compatibility problem?
---
Hmm, also the filename in --json output may get normalized to something
other than the input. Eg, git-annex add, for "./foo" outputs "foo".
(Due to passing through git ls-files --others IIRC.)
Maybe the json output should include a field that mirrors the actual
input:
{"command":"add","success":false,"input":"./foo","file":"foo","error":"File does not exist"}
Still, making the changes to --json output to address the above feels
cleaner than wrapping input and output with a job id like the ASYNC
extension does. Those changes would also generally be an improvement to
json output in non-async mode.
Making the changes to --json output to address the above stuff, if
possible, feels cleaner than wrapping input and output with a job id like
the ASYNC extension does. Those changes would also generally be an
improvement to json output in non-async mode.
[[!tag projects/datalad]]