On Sun, Nov 01, 2015 at 08:04:28PM -0500, Richard Heck wrote: > On 11/01/2015 07:54 PM, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > >On Sun, Nov 01, 2015 at 10:33:09PM +0100, Richard Heck wrote: > >>commit 4c16c61579d37f00c252ace8cf79d0573ca626bb > >>Author: Richard Heck <rgh...@lyx.org> > >>Date: Sun Nov 1 16:32:52 2015 -0500 > >> > >> Add warning message if we do no conversion. > >Why have a warning? > > > >We do not have a warning for: > >lyx -e lyx21x Customization.21.lyx > >where Customization.21.lyx is already in 2.1.x format. > > > >There is no warning for: > >convert abc.jpg abc.jpg > > > convert nipaudit2014-004.jpg a.jpg > > diff nipaudit2014-004.jpg a.jpg > Binary files nipaudit2014-004.jpg and a.jpg differ > > So apparently not a no-op. > > >ffmpeg -i abc.flac abc.flac > > > >These are a little different though because I think they do actually do > >something (not sure what though). > > Yes, I think because there are certain defaults in place. In fact, I get: > >ffmpeg -i a.mp4 b.mp4 > [aac @ 0x16ec700] The encoder 'aac' is experimental but experimental codecs > are not enabled, add '-strict -2' if you want to use it.
OK those were indeed bad examples by me then. dos2unix seems like a better example: $ mv mynotes testing1 $ cp testing1 testing2 $ dos2unix testing1 dos2unix: converting file testing1 to Unix format ... $ md5sum testing1 testing2 9ca7056b4ba26136eb22fe885a6704b2 testing1 9ca7056b4ba26136eb22fe885a6704b2 testing2 > >On the other hand, I do see some reasoning for the change. Why would > >someone try to convert a file to the same format? If they are doing > >that, then maybe they misunderstood something so we should give a > >warning to make sure they did not make a mistake and want to export to a > >different format. Is that the correct reasoning? > > Yes, that was the idea. It's a somewhat strange thing to do. As I said, > there's a perfectly good reason to do it---batch conversion---but it's not > the normal case, and it seems worth at least saying, "Hey, you might want to > check this". Makes sense. I just wonder why no other conversion tool (either on command line, or in a programming language) that I know of behaves like this. Sometimes though it is good to break convention. > The way lyx2lyx is called from LyX itself, this would never happen: We don't > try to do that ourselves. > So it would only happen from the command line in which case the warning > can be ignored easily enough. I don't know if I like this asymmetry between GUI and command line. In any case, my objection falls under the category of "nitpicking" so I'm fine with the change. We should discuss more important things :) Sometimes I have to remind myself of that. Scott
