I told Lyra a dry run would name every rename. It does the opposite.
process() skipped the rename whenever dry_run was set, then found nothing
at the target and fell through to the encode path. So previewing --fat32-safe
announced a full re-encode of every track whose name held a reserved
character — when the real run moves those files in a moment.
A preview that inverts the cost of the thing being previewed is worse than no
preview at all.
Prune compounded it. With nothing renamed, the pre-sanitisation files are still
on disk, so they were listed as orphans due for deletion. The same dry run
therefore claimed the library would be re-encoded and the originals thrown
away. Neither is true.
Change
A rename is now its own outcome:
--dry-run logs would rename A -> B, not would encode
renames are counted apart from encodes in the pass summary, so 0 encoded, 1247 renamed reads correctly
a dry run does not list the pre-rename files as orphans — nothing was moved,
so they are still there, but they are what a real run would move, not what
it would delete
Testing
69 tests, green locally and in docker build --target test. Four new: the dry
run reporting a rename, not calling the old paths orphans, moving nothing, and
the separate counts in the summary.
## Problem
I told Lyra a dry run would name every rename. It does the opposite.
`process()` skipped the rename whenever `dry_run` was set, then found nothing
at the target and fell through to the encode path. So previewing `--fat32-safe`
announced **a full re-encode** of every track whose name held a reserved
character — when the real run moves those files in a moment.
A preview that inverts the cost of the thing being previewed is worse than no
preview at all.
Prune compounded it. With nothing renamed, the pre-sanitisation files are still
on disk, so they were listed as orphans due for deletion. The same dry run
therefore claimed the library would be re-encoded *and* the originals thrown
away. Neither is true.
## Change
A rename is now its own outcome:
- `--dry-run` logs `would rename A -> B`, not `would encode`
- renames are counted apart from encodes in the pass summary, so `0 encoded,
1247 renamed` reads correctly
- a dry run does not list the pre-rename files as orphans — nothing was moved,
so they are still there, but they are what a real run would *move*, not what
it would delete
## Testing
69 tests, green locally and in `docker build --target test`. Four new: the dry
run reporting a rename, not calling the old paths orphans, moving nothing, and
the separate counts in the summary.
--dry-run described a FAT32 rename as an encode. process() skipped the rename
whenever dry_run was set, then found no file at the target and fell through to
the encode path, so a preview of enabling --fat32-safe announced a full
re-encode of every track whose name held a reserved character. The real run
moves those files in a moment. A preview that inverts the cost of the thing
being previewed is worse than no preview at all.
Prune compounded it. With nothing renamed, the pre-sanitisation files are still
on disk, and they were reported as orphans due for deletion -- so the same dry
run claimed the library would be re-encoded and the originals thrown away,
neither of which is true.
Renames are now their own outcome: reported as "would rename" in a dry run,
counted separately from encodes in the pass summary, and excluded from the
orphan list when a dry run leaves them in place.
Blocking a user prevents them from interacting with repositories, such as opening or commenting on pull requests or issues. Learn more about blocking a user.
Problem
I told Lyra a dry run would name every rename. It does the opposite.
process()skipped the rename wheneverdry_runwas set, then found nothingat the target and fell through to the encode path. So previewing
--fat32-safeannounced a full re-encode of every track whose name held a reserved
character — when the real run moves those files in a moment.
A preview that inverts the cost of the thing being previewed is worse than no
preview at all.
Prune compounded it. With nothing renamed, the pre-sanitisation files are still
on disk, so they were listed as orphans due for deletion. The same dry run
therefore claimed the library would be re-encoded and the originals thrown
away. Neither is true.
Change
A rename is now its own outcome:
--dry-runlogswould rename A -> B, notwould encode0 encoded, 1247 renamedreads correctlyso they are still there, but they are what a real run would move, not what
it would delete
Testing
69 tests, green locally and in
docker build --target test. Four new: the dryrun reporting a rename, not calling the old paths orphans, moving nothing, and
the separate counts in the summary.