wcd - chdir for DOS and Unix / Feature Requests / #2 Suggestion to store files under ~/.wcd/ by default

Pasting in follow up on http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=518132

--------------------------------------------------------------

From: Erwin Waterlander <waterlan@xs4all.nl>
To: jaalto <jari.aalto@cante.net>, 518132@bugs.debian.org
Cc: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>, waterlan@xs4all.nl
Subject: Re: Bug#518132: wcd: Suggestion to store files under ~/.wcd/
Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2009 12:29:37 +0100

Hi,

Wcd already supports an alternative location via the WCDHOME environment
variable. Setting this variable will do what is suggested for WCD_ROOT.

Many programs use a $HOME sub directory for configuration files, but
many more use by default just $HOME. Since files are hidden it's not a
big hinder. The number of files is not so big. By default you have only
two (.treedata.wcd and .stack.wcd). The other three are optional
(.alias.wcd .ban.wcd .extra.wcd).

I see wcd as an enhancement of the shell which has also all its files in
$HOME (.bashrc, .profile, .bash_login, ...)

Because $HOME is usually defined on unix/linux it simplifies the
installation.

I would like to stay backwards compatible, so people don't need to move
their custom wcd files if they upgrade.

The grand old NCD used to store its tree info in the root of the drive.
On unix this is comparable to $HOME for a user (on enterprise systems).

best regards,

Erwin Waterlander

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Jari Aalto <jari.aalto@tamk.fi>
To: Erwin Waterlander <waterlan@xs4all.nl>
Cc: 518132@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bug#518132: wcd: Suggestion to store files under ~/.wcd/
Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2009 15:37:48 +0200

Erwin Waterlander <waterlan@xs4all.nl> writes:

> Hi,
>
> Wcd already supports an alternative location via the WCDHOME environment
> variable.

Noticed, that'd why I adjusted the bug report accordingly.

The Login shells are exception. Other programs would better use

~/.<program>/

An example: my $HOME contains

ls -a | grep '^\.' | wc -l
204

Any help managing that is welcomed. There are benefits in separate dirs:

- backup by directory
- version control by directory
- ignore directories from searches; find(1) etc.

Jari

-----------------------------------------------------

From: Erwin Waterlander <waterlan@xs4all.nl>
To: Jari Aalto <jari.aalto@tamk.fi>
Cc: 518132@bugs.debian.org, waterlan@xs4all.nl
Subject: Re: Bug#518132: wcd: Suggestion to store files under ~/.wcd/
Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2009 15:26:31 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hi,

The amount of data that is stored by for instance Mozilla under
~/.mozilla is enormous compared to the few files of wcd. Logically you
don't want all Mozilla's files in your $HOME folder.

In my $HOME directory I have 244 hidden files and directories.
> ls -a | grep '^\.' | wc -l
244

Most wcd users will have only 2 .wcd files in $HOME. I you remove those
and add a .wcd directory, the amount goes down by 1. If it is common to
have over 200 hidden files and directories in $HOME, the impact is less
than 0.5% in most cases. Is it really worth the effort? I don't mind
having 244 or 240 hidden files in $HOME. And the user always has the
option to use WCDHOME if he/she doesn't like the files in $HOME.

best regards,

Erwin

-----------------------------------------------------------------

From: Jari Aalto <jari.aalto@cante.net>
To: Erwin Waterlander <waterlan@xs4all.nl>
Cc: 518132@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bug#518132: wcd: Suggestion to store files under ~/.wcd/
Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2009 14:23:36 +0200

Erwin Waterlander <waterlan@xs4all.nl> writes:

> The amount of data that is stored by for instance Mozilla under ~/.mozilla
> is enormous ...

There are many application that only have few files. Exerpts:

[DIR] ~/.ccache/:
CACHEDIR.TAG
stats

[DIR] ~/.dillo/:
adblock.txt
cookiesrc
cookies.txt
dpi_socket_dir

[DIR] ~/.gstreamer-0.10/:
registry.i486.xml
registry.x86_64.bin

[DIR] ~/.putty/:
sshhostkeys

[DIR] ~/.VirtualBox/:
compreg.dat
VirtualBox.xml
xpti.dat

[DIR] ~/.xfe/:
trash
xferc

...

The point is not, how many. It's more clean to have each application to
reserve its own directory

~/.<application 1>/
~/.<application 2>/
~/.<application 3>/

> In my $HOME directory I have 244 hidden files and directories.
>> ls -a | grep '^\.' | wc -l
> 244
>
> Most wcd users will have only 2 .wcd files in $HOME...

From the original report:

Any help managing that is welcomed. There are benefits in separate
dirs:

- backup by directory
- version control by directory
- ignore directories from searches; find(1) etc.

Jari

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Erwin Waterlander <waterlan@xs4all.nl>
To: Jari Aalto <jari.aalto@cante.net>
Cc: 518132@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bug#518132: wcd: Suggestion to store files under ~/.wcd/
Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2009 12:36:40 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hi,

I agree. It would be cleaner. But I don't like it that the backward
compatibility is broken. Wcd has been backward compatible since the
start, that is over 12 years.

In enterprise network systems people use the -u option to jump to
directories of colleagues. If you move data files you break this
functionality, because there are still people using older versions of
wcd. I see it also at my work. People keep on using old versions for
long time. I want to bother them to upgrade. Such systems can have
hundreds of users, and you have no control, about which version of wcd
they use.

Also many users will have to move custom made tree files. There are even
people who build scripts around wcd. I want to keep them happy.

``Software is like sex. Make one mistake, and support it for the rest of
your life.'' ;-)
This was not a big mistake. It's only about a few files. I prefer
keeping people happy.

Erwin

-------------------------------------------------------------

> ~/.wcd/
>
> I agree. It would be cleaner. But I don't like it that the backward
> compatibility is broken. Wcd has been backward compatible since the
> start, that is over 12 years.

I don't think there would be compatibility issues:

- IF there is WCDHOME use it
- IF there is ~/.treedata.wcd file, use old behavior
- ELSE use new scheme, where data is put under ~/.wcd/

New format would appear only for new users. Or, if people prefer, they
could migrate manually as instructed in "to be" manual page:

mkdir ~/.wcd/
mv ~/.[a-z]*.wcd ~/.wcd/

Jari

------------------------------------------------------------------

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Jari Aalto schreef:
>> ~/.wcd/
>>
>> I agree. It would be cleaner. But I don't like it that the backward
>> compatibility is broken. Wcd has been backward compatible since the
>> start, that is over 12 years.
>>
>
> I don't think there would be compatibility issues:
>
> - IF there is WCDHOME use it
> - IF there is ~/.treedata.wcd file, use old behavior
> - ELSE use new scheme, where data is put under ~/.wcd/
>
> New format would appear only for new users. Or, if people prefer, they
> could migrate manually as instructed in "to be" manual page:
>
> mkdir ~/.wcd/
> mv ~/.[a-z]*.wcd ~/.wcd/
>
> Jari
>
People who use an old version of wcd have a problem if they want to jump
to folders of people who use the new version. Old wcd will still look
for ~/.treedata.wcd of other user. He may be reading an obsolete file it
does exist, or find no file at all. This is an issue.

New wcd should first check in ~/.wcd/ and then in ~/ of other user.
Assuming that if both files exist the other user probably uses the new
wcd. For new wcd users there is no issue.

Erwin

Suggestion to store files under ~/.wcd/ by default

Group

Searches

Help

#2 Suggestion to store files under ~/.wcd/ by default

Discussion