[development] files owned by uid, patch review request.

Cog Rusty cog.rusty at gmail.com
Tue May 8 12:23:55 UTC 2007

On 5/8/07, Dries Buytaert <dries.buytaert at gmail.com> wrote:
> The current model is that when you delete a node, the files
> associated with that node are also deleted -- both from the database
> and from disk.  With this proposed patch, the files would remain on
> disk, and you'd have no way to delete them -- nor from the database,
> nor from disk.  (Unless maybe you use a contrib module).
> How do you all feel about this?  Does this drawback (if considered a
> drawback) outweight the advantages of this patch?
> --
> Dries Buytaert  ::  http://www.buytaert.net/

I think there is a number of behaviors which could be considered
legitimate and more or less common and not be hindered. Of course the
question of choosing a default behavior in core remains.

- Delete a node - delete attached files, no garbage left behind.
- Delete a node - preserve attached files for reuse - supply a role
permission and an UI for managing/reassigning/deleting them.
- Delete a user - delete owned files (for example, personal galleries).
- Delete a user - preserve owned files - supply a role permission and
an UI for managing/reassigning/deleting them.

These options were the reason that I thought that -- at least at the
user level -- a file should feel like an independent entity.

In the last option, ownership of orphaned user files by uid #1 should
not mean that only user #1 has to manage them.

It is also interesting that while we currently have the first option
in core, a very popular approach is the one used by the image module
where the file is slapped on another node, an "image" node, which you
can leave undeleted and possibly accessible through a gallery, and
that works somehow like the second option.

More information about the development mailing list