On 30.05.2025 19:43, ichthyo wrote:
On 30.05.25 11:06, Kristian Amlie wrote:
I'm somewhat skeptical of automatically resaving in general. If the
config
is compatible enough not to require any warnings, then resaving is
unnecessary, since loading it again later will produce the same results.
This is a good observation ....
As said, I am not not sure what would be the best course of action
- not saving, just warning. Then possible problems (things we developers
overlooked) might materialise later, and might go unnoticed by the user
But isn't all migration done during load? What is kept in memory is
really just a mirror of the most recent config format, isn't it? Because
all problems should already become apparent without saving then.
OTOH, maybe config is a special case because it compares settings and
saves only specific ones. I can't say I remember exactly how it works...
- saving and warning, which would perform any implicit config migration
- should we just always warn when the config version differs?
I would follow the semantic versioning mantra: Warn when major is
different, and when minor is higher, otherwise don't warn.
- should we re-save on every minor bump? (as we did up to now)?
I didn't know we did this, actually. My vote would be not to save unless
requested.
- or should we stick to the current idea to warn only on exceptional cases
and only re-save in those cases (as it is implemented on my branch)?
I think we should never resave *automatically*, but it's ok to encourage
the user to do so.
--
Kristian
_______________________________________________
Yoshimi-devel mailing list
Yoshimi-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/yoshimi-devel
