Re: [WDYT] org-attach-sync better remove an empty attachment directory?

[Marco Wahl <marcowahlsoft@gmail.com>]

Marco Wahl <marcowahlsoft@gmail.com> writes:

>     Marco> Please recall that only empty attachment directories would be
>     Marco> removed, so removal of a directory--and in particular one
>     Marco> that existed before its interpretation as Org
>     Marco> attachment--wouldn't be a big deal AFAICS.
>
>     Tim> Not as confident here. I can imagine workflows and other
>     Tim> external scripts which might expect a specific directory
>     Tim> structure that could be broken if a directory was removed (even
>     Tim> when empty). Hence my suggestion it needs to be something you
>     Tim> can turn off.
>
>     Tim> Likely this is something which should be controllable via a
>     Tim> custom setting?
>
>     Marco> To be honest I'd rather not make another customizable thing
>     Marco> out of it to keep the overall complexity low.
>     Marco> 
>     Marco> OTOH we could easily introduce e.g. customizable
>     Marco> org-attach-delete-empty-dirs-on-sync.
>
>     Tim> Appreciate the problem with far too many customization options,
>     Tim> but when it comes to software 'automatically' doing something,
>     Tim> like removal of an empty directory, especially when it might
>     Tim> not have been responsible for creation of the directory, it is
>     Tim> better to provide some way to allow the user to turn off the
>     Tim> behaviour. I would default to having it enabled though.
>
>     Colin> I'm afraid I for one often have empty attach directories
>     Colin> which I leave alone knowing that one day soon - sometimes
>     Colin> very soon - they will be used again. Cannot the user be asked
>     Colin> if he wants the directory removed?
>
> Thanks Tim and Colin.
>
> We could introduce multiple possibilities to choose from.
>
> 1. Ask in case of an empty directory if it should be deleted.
> 2. Don't ask.  Don't touch an empty directory.  (The state now.)
> 3. Don't ask.  Delete empty directory.
>
> We could also make 3. the default setting.

I made a mistake here.

If we do this I vote for option 1. (not 3.) as default (following the
suggestion by Colin) since it is the most interactive variant.  If the
question gets annoying the user can switch to one of the other options.

Sorry for the confusion.