Closed emthompson-usgs closed 2 years ago
I don't understand the desire to NOT rename the directory when renaming a project. The default conf and data paths for system level projects is gmprojects/PROJECT_NAME/conf
and gmprojects/PROJECT_NAME/data
. When renaming a project, I think most users would expect the data and conf directory paths to be updated to match the new name. This was the behavior before I updated the projects subcommand.
Can you explain the rationale for not renaming the project directory paths for conf and data?
The simple reason is that the way things are currently configured, the path to the conf and data directories can be set to anything and the project name may or may not be a part of those paths. The reason we put in this flexibility is that it is likely convenient for some users to have multiple projects that have separate data directories but share a conf directory.
Yes. But the conf and data directories are only renamed if the project name is in their filesystem path.
I did put in specific commands to directly modify the paths. This seems like he correct way to do it to me, given that the paths are already customizable, and interacting with it in this way will give in consistent results. I don't really like the idea of having the function sometimes modify the paths and sometimes not depending on how the user has set things.
If we don't think that it makes sense for users to control the paths of the projects, we can just change it so that the paths are always set to the defaults (no option to customize). Maybe no one uses the flexibility of setting them to anything other than the defaults.
Okay. We just need to make sure this behavior is well documented and mention this change in behavior in the Changelog.
Closes #1026.