Closed das-g closed 7 years ago
_name_prefix
isn't sluggified in this pull request, is this being handled in a separate pull-request or is it just missing here?
_name_prefix
isn't sluggified in this pull request, is this being handled in a separate pull-request or is it just missing here?
Neither: If I'm not mistaken, it was already sufficiently slugified before this PR. This PR just makes the PBF export use it, instead of the bare area_name
.
We already expect _name_prefix
to be, well, a valid partial file name. (Otherwise, exporting excerpts with a /
in their name would fail for other formats, too.) And indeed, produce_pbf(...)
seems to be only called from Conversion._create_pbf(...)
, which (as Conversion._conversion_process(...)
) is called only from Conversion.start_format_extraction(...)
which (outside of tests) seems to only be called from converter.convert()
, which initializes the conversion with its filename_prefix
argument.
converter.convert()
itself is (outside of tests) only called by itself (with the same arguments, except for use_worker
) and by Job.start_conversion(...)
it seems, the latter passing Job._filename_prefix()
as the filename_prefix
which slugifies the excerpt name as well as some other components it puts into the string it returns.
:+1:
fixes #831