Bug?: Move files + [Skip All] dont delete skipped files

islogged · Post by *islogged » 2016-03-19, 05:10 UTC

Just execute menu "Mark > Restore Selection" in the source directory after the move has finished, followed by pressing the Del-key.
Problem solved?

Message n°1 of this Topic :

"Of couse i can manually delete the source after when the Move operations are finished.
But first it's mean the Move operation become like a Copy one ...
And Second, i often use multiples Background Move and of course after i always forget to delete all the Directories Sources of my Moves ... Twisted Evil"

If you need 'your way' more often, just write (or ask for) a user command to 'move and overwrite always, don't ask me ever, I know what I do'.
Join that command to the TC menu or to an shortcut and you have what you want.

???

also windows command line handles this scenario in the same way as TC.

Right, Scenario is [Skip All] or [Overwrite All] depend of the options ...

Funny thing is, explorer doesn't have a skip option at all (at least in win7)

Have in Windows 10 !

it's also dangerous I think. (For the reasons allready discussed)

It's Not, some people told before in this Topic [Move] it's a [copy]+[Del] and Del files always go to the garbage, then you always can recover your files anyway on mistake.

[Overwrite All] is more dangerous in the fact, because you really loose your Target Files if you mistake and nobody complain of this point ...

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

When you ask for a Move Operation what you asking for ?

Ask 1 : You ask to find your Source file in the Target after the operation
Ask 2 : You ask to don't find your file in the Source after the operation.

It's The Rules of a True Move function ! all other is blabla ^^

----------

Now what about if the Filename already exist in the Target ?
Then Tc ask to the user, because only the user know what to do !!!

And what ask the user to himself ...
Only 1 question : Do I want to keep this target file? [yes] or [no]

If the answer is [yes] what's the User wants ?

Case 1 : He wants to keep the target file because he know it's exactly the same file as the source.
Case 2 : He wants to keep the target file because he know the files are différents and he wants to keep both versions of them.

In Case 1 :
- The copy operation is like already done, then no need to process it.
- Tc need only to delete the Source File (because it's a move at first)
In Case 2 :
- Tc rename the Source
- Tc copy the Renamed Source File in the Target place
- Tc delete the Source File (because it's a move at first)

If the answer is [no] what's the User wants ?

Case 3 :
- He wants Tc delete the current Target File
- He wants Tc copy the Source File in the Target place
- He wants Tc delete the Source File (because it's a move at first)

----------

For me That's the correct process of a Move Function !

Then in Case 1 : Name of the option is [del source] or [del all source]
Then in Case 2 : Name of the option is [rename] or [auto-rename]
Then in Case 3 : Name of the option is [overwrite] or [overwrite all]

And that's the Main Options we need to find in the TC options Box.
But sadness it's not the case ...

Ps : And of course we can keep others options like [Append], [Cancel], [Compare], [etc...], it's not the problem !

Horst.Epp · Post by *Horst.Epp » 2016-03-19, 09:43 UTC

Can we please stop this lengthy useless thread.
The current TC logic has satisfied most users over the last years
and there is no change necessary just for one user.

islogged · Post by *islogged » 2016-03-19, 17:04 UTC

Can we please stop this lengthy useless thread.

The truth is never useless ^^

The current TC logic has satisfied most users over the last years
and there is no change necessary just for one user.

I prefer my arguments ^^

All the time i lost here, it's only acting for a better TC !
Thanks for this comprehension ...

HolgerK · Post by *HolgerK » 2016-03-19, 17:52 UTC

islogged wrote:The truth is never useless ^^
I prefer my arguments ^^

The problem of truth is in a way easy to state: what truths are, and what (if anything) makes them true.
Thanks for understanding that most of the time truth is not absolute, but may depend on the point of view or personal preferences or interests.

But this is not a philosophers club.

Just make a suggestion for some kind of specialized "combine all file entities on target side only" functionality (the opposite of a synchronization?).
But please don't argue for an additional dangerous option inside a well defined (also in your eyes limited) functionality like move, just because you would prefer it here.
The explanation for such an option would be so complex that nobody would read, understand or use it (or may use it and complain afterwards).

MyPointOfView
Holger

islogged · Post by *islogged » 2016-03-19, 22:59 UTC

he problem of truth is in a way easy to state: what truths are, and what (if anything) makes them true.
Thanks for understanding that most of the time truth is not absolute, but may depend on the point of view or personal preferences or interests.

But this is not a philosophers club.

You forget the "^^" even you quote them.
And you forget first i answered to that :

"Can we please stop this lengthy useless thread.
The current TC logic has satisfied most users over the last years
and there is no change necessary just for one user."

It was not so objective and was totally free declarations !
People who don't like the thread can move another one, no need to react !

Just make a suggestion for some kind of specialized "combine all file entities on target side only" functionality (the opposite of a synchronization?).
But please don't argue for an additional dangerous option inside a well defined (also in your eyes limited) functionality like move, just because you would prefer it here.
The explanation for such an option would be so complex that nobody would read, understand or use it (or may use it and complain afterwards).

Sorry, but i had technically already answered to that.
And some options in Move function seems more useless than my suggestion ... if you can stay honest.

Then no have problem with this thread ...
Only maybe with the participants who do not understand the stakes of what I speak.

Some people like evolutions and some No, that's how it is !

HolgerK · Post by *HolgerK » 2016-03-20, 00:19 UTC

islogged wrote:
Just make a suggestion for some kind of specialized "combine all file entities on target side only" functionality (the opposite of a synchronization?). ..
Sorry, but i had technically already answered to that.

Inside a discussion thread placed in the english user to user forum with a title "Move + Skip All > Bug ?"?
My suggestion was to use the TC suggestions (English) forum.

Some people like evolutions and some No, that's how it is !

Some people don't see a evolution in user interface by adding a rarely used (and potential dangerous) option to an already crowded user dialog.

MyPointOfView
Holger

islogged · Post by *islogged » 2016-03-20, 18:11 UTC

Some people don't see a evolution in user interface by adding a rarely used (and potential dangerous) option to an already crowded user dialog.

I invite people to read all my messages of this topic one or two times if needed.
Because i already demonstrated that all this arguments (always the same) are 100% WRONG !, sorry

My suggestion was to use the TC suggestions (English) forum.

No worry, now i know it's not a bug ... it's planned, but i have to much suggestions to do (not only this one), than for the moment i wait a little bit ...
Because the Ghisler's brothers seems already to much busy ... and me too ^^

HolgerK · Post by *HolgerK » 2016-03-20, 18:51 UTC

islogged wrote:Because i already demonstrated that all this arguments (always the same) are 100% WRONG !, sorry

Okay, also crying does not make your arguments better.
Let's try to find the cardinal logical error.

When you ask for a Move Operation what you asking for ?

The expected result of a Move operation is that all files moved from place A to place B are identical afterwards in place B.

Only 1 question : Do I want to keep this target file? [yes] or [no]
If the answer is [yes] what's the User wants ?

Case 1 : He wants to keep the target file because he know it's exactly the same file as the source
....
In Case 1 :
- The copy operation is like already done, then no need to process it.

Neither the user nor TC can guarantee that the source and the target has the same content.
The only thing you decided before the move operation is that the files at place A are more important than the files in place B.
Without knowing (not assuming) that file A is identical with file B, the deletion of file A violates the rule of the move operation.

Only a overwrite (or a compare by content before deletion) would guarantee that the destination is the the same as the source.
Your interest in this point is to save this time needed for comparison or overwrite.
The interest of all other people in this thread is that TC should not be mentioned in a hitlist "50 ways to nuke your data"

1. format C:
2. del *.* /s
...
n. Use TC's move method

Regards
Holger

islogged · Post by *islogged » 2016-03-21, 02:11 UTC

I must admit two things with this topic ...

The first is : I'm so tired with it ...
And the second is : It's the first time i can read the begin of a real argument ... (thanks for that)

But ... because there is a but ...
I also already answered to that, in the past !

The expected result of a Move operation is that all files moved from place A to place B are identical afterwards in place B.

I'm Ok !

The interest of all other people in this thread is that TC should not be mentioned in a hitlist "50 ways to nuke your data"

Neither the user nor TC can guarantee that the source and the target has the same content
The only thing you decided before the move operation is that the files at place A are more important than the files in place B.

I'm not Ok !

As you told yourself ...
If you can't guarantee the same content source/target, in some cases file B can be more important (or equal importance) to keep than the file A.

And as i already told in this topic ...
[Overwrite] option irretrievably destroyed the file B version ... who can NOT be recovered (on mistake)

My proposition is to add the [del source] option, right ?
[del source] option only move file A in the recycle bin, which CAN be easily recovered (on mistake)

Can't you see the difference ?

I don't have problem with the [Overwrite] option, i just tell my proposition is NO MORE DANGEROUS then this one.
OK ?

As for reminder, you can choose Overwrite or Skip options instead :
Unlike [Overwrite], my proposition permit to don't rewrite for nothing Giga of files (or more) you know as identical !
- First, you save your Time
- Second, you save your system availability
- And third, you save your Hardware (Hdd)

Unlike [Skip], my proposition permit to don't always need to remove yourself and afterward your sources files after a Move Operation !
- First, because you chose a Move (and not Copy) Operation for this reason.
- Second, when you use Multiples Move operations in background like Tc permit, is very difficult to always find afterward what you moved before, and back in all your old pathSources because you need to manually delete yourself all filesSources stayed in each pathSources of all your previous Moves

- And third as Second say by the fact, you save a precious Time and multiples boring Operations.

Move functionality is one of real basic function for a File Manager (as copy, del, mkdir), but sorry even it's basic ... this one is not complete for TC.

Hoping you can hear my arguments.
Thanks

Ps n°1 : I don't think anybody could be attack (in justice) the Ghisler Corporation because they lost files by themselves ...
Then it's better to remove all the [Del] and [Overwrite] functions in every Files Managers. Stupidity doesn't have limits ?

Ps n°2 : And Nobody Cry here ...

Dalai · Post by *Dalai » 2016-03-21, 03:39 UTC

islogged wrote:My proposition is to add the [del source] option, right ?
[del source] option only move file A in the recycle bin, which CAN be easily recovered (on mistake)

One note on this, since it's not entirely correct: If the recycle bin is disabled, you can't recover any files so easily. Furthermore, if the files to be deleted are too large for the recycle bin (because it's too full and/or reached its limit), you can't recover so easily. What I'm trying to say: Deleting to the recycle bin doesn't always mean that you can find your files in there, even if the files are deleted without the use of the Shift key.

MfG Dalai

islogged · Post by *islogged » 2016-03-21, 03:48 UTC

One note on this, since it's not entirely correct: If the recycle bin is disabled, you can't recover any files so easily. Furthermore, if the files to be deleted are too large for the recycle bin (because it's too full and/or reached its limit), you can't recover so easily. What I'm trying to say: Deleting to the recycle bin doesn't always mean that you can find your files in there, even if the files are deleted without the use of the Shift key.

Totally Right !
Then we need to Ban [Del], [Shift Del*] and [Overwrite] functions in TC too ^^

Anyway, and by experiences ...
In most of cases, i could recover files directly deleted (with some recoverSoftwares) but never when they was already Overwrited like the [Overwrite] function does ...

---
*But in case of me, i ask for it : http://ghisler.ch/board/viewtopic.php?t=43731&sid=a6d25f9481075cc7f172f279c1f788b2 ^^

HolgerK · Post by *HolgerK » 2016-03-21, 10:14 UTC

islogged wrote:If you can't guarantee the same content source/target, in some cases file B can be more important (or equal importance) to keep than the file A.

Thats the point where [Skip all] is usefull because you will get a second chance to revise your decision that files in B may be not so import like files in A.

And as i already told in this topic ...
[Overwrite] option irretrievably destroyed the file B version ... who can NOT be recovered (on mistake)

NTFS system protection + Previous version
And last but not least:
If you do not have a backup of your data the data are not important!

My proposition is to add the [del source] option, right ?

I can think about such an option inside a tool window like Synchronize.
Let's call it "De-Synchronize" with options to mark files in place A for moving/overwriteing to B or deleting files in A.
In this case the user has the chance to compare the complete file list.
Your Delete option (especially Delete all) is a blind decision base on a single conflict which is simple to dangerous if you Move a complex directory structure.

- First, you save your Time
- Second, you save your system availability
- And third, you save your Hardware (Hdd)

These are only valid points if you move from one drive to another.
Moving on the same drive is just a rename operation.
Should your Delete option be offered in this case too also this would neither save time nor your hard disk (but lead to different result)?

Ps n°2 : And Nobody Cry here ...

Writing ALL CAPITAL is often perceived as crying. http://www.ghisler.ch/board/viewtopic.php?t=2 Point 9.

Regards
Holger

Post by *Hacker » 2016-03-21, 12:43 UTC

FFS, guys, are we really going to argue it is "too dangerous"? I've had some suggestions turned down because they were "too dangerous". Don't use this argument. Just don't make it default.
A user wants a potentially "dangerous" option which noone else seems to see the point of, OK, as long as it's not the default there is no problem with it and that's it, now it's up to Christian.
The only problem I can see is that it should be handled as a suggestion, not as a bug report.

Roman

islogged · Post by *islogged » 2016-03-21, 17:49 UTC

The only problem I can see is that it should be handled as a suggestion, not as a bug report.

Right !

Your Delete option (especially Delete all) is a blind decision base on a single conflict which is simple to dangerous if you Move a complex directory structure.

It's for what the user need to have the choice between [Del Source] and [Del All Sources] as for Skip and Overwrite options.

I can add (but it's another subject), i'm also for a "Cancel Last File Operation" in Tc as i told here : http://ghisler.ch/board/viewtopic.php?t=43630&highlight= who definitely solve this point.

If you do not have a backup of your data the data are not important!

Then you are Ok that my suggestion stay reasonable !

The interest of all other people in this thread is that TC should not be mentioned in a hitlist "50 ways to nuke your data"

i want to add about this, when the choice is done here : http://i.imgur.com/3jcAUzD.jpg The responsibility is fully delegate to the User, and can not be reproached to the Software.
Anyway, for a [Del Source] option we can imagine to add a second dialogBox "Are you sure to delete (all) this file(s) ?" [Confirm] [Skip (All)] for people who want a lot of security.

Ps n°1 : I'm not agree with the idea to place this option in the Synchronize Tool
Ps n°2 : And i don't Cry ... i Shout ^^

HolgerK · Post by *HolgerK » 2016-03-21, 20:24 UTC

Ps n°1 : I'm not agree with the idea to place this option in the Synchronize Tool

I still not agree with the idea to put a delete option into the move operation.
Reason: this is unexpected, does not match the clear rule of a move operation, unnecessary if you move inside a drive, needs an explanation in help section under which circumstances this option can be useful and an explicit warning under which conditions this options should never ever be used.
Seems that yourself did not understand at first that the resulting files may differ from what you are expecting.

Ps n°2 : And i don't Cry ... i Shout ^^

Well, something between shout and yell.

Regards
Holger