Shouldn't the rename-annotations command delete the old set path?

[sarpu]

Not at all urgent, but I was following the Alex's instructions to make the eaf/annotator1 -> eaf/an1 change, and noticed that the command doesn't remove the old set. Is that intentional? If not I can submit a pull request so that the old set is removed which seems more intuitive.

https://github.com/LAAC-LSCP/ChildProject/blob/51b5aa7448c1b5b360d23be7ee43dcb7c4c81e03/ChildProject/annotations.py#L386-L395

[lucasgautheron]

I think you're right! I'm thinking rename-annotations should always be recursive such that this function could just:

• move the whole directory (annotations/<set> to annotations/<new-set>)
• update the index accordingly for <set> and its subsets

Unless we can think of some cases for which we don't want rename-annotations to apply recursively to all subsets, but I don't see any.

[alecristia]

agreed! rename should remove

On Thu 17 Jun 2021 at 08:43, Lucas Gautheron @.***> wrote:

I think you're right! I'm thinking rename-annotations should always be recursive such that this function could just:

• move the whole directory (annotations/ to annotations/)
• update the index accordingly for and its subsets

Unless we can think of some cases for which we don't want rename-annotations to apply recursively to all subsets, but I don't see any.

— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/LAAC-LSCP/ChildProject/issues/243#issuecomment-862972837, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABY6PHIXJYCVJFL63F6363TTTGKR3ANCNFSM462P5GAA .

--

---

Alex (Alejandrina) Cristia Researcher, CNRS Laboratoire de Sciences Cognitives et Psycholinguistique 29, rue d'Ulm, 75005, Paris, FRANCE My site: www.acristia.org