[digikam] [Bug 363697] New: Album visible even after deletion

[bugzilla_noreply]

https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=363697

--- Comment #18 from Maik Qualmann <[hidden email]> ---
Created attachment 99742
  --> https://bugs.kde.org/attachment.cgi?id=99742&action=edit
albumRoot.patch

A first new patch, it works. The question is, is correct and can solved this
problem?

Maik

--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
_______________________________________________
Digikam-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-devel

[bugzilla_noreply]

https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=363697

--- Comment #19 from [hidden email] ---
(In reply to Maik Qualmann from comment #18)
> Created attachment 99742 [details]
> albumRoot.patch
>
> A first new patch, it works. The question is, is correct and can solved this
> problem?

Well, it did work for me. After deletion of album, it was neither visible, nor
present in DB.
And this patch solves the issue in right way I think.

--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
_______________________________________________
Digikam-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-devel

[bugzilla_noreply]

https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=363697

--- Comment #20 from Richard Mortimer <[hidden email]> ---
I like the look of Maik's patch. It does seem to be working in a portable way
that does not rely on any magic database primary key values. A deleted
AlbumRoot is easy to identify too.

A few comments on the patch:

the magic relativePath value "*deleted*" should really be a constant that is
used throughout the application. That way it is easier to ensure consistency
and find places where the value is used.

I haven't looked but does addAlbumRoot cope gracefully with situations where
there is already an existing albumRoot for deleted? If not then the code needs
to check for presence of a deleted album root before trying to add one.

--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
_______________________________________________
Digikam-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-devel

[bugzilla_noreply]

https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=363697

--- Comment #21 from Maik Qualmann <[hidden email]> ---
I wonder just what need the stale album function. Perhaps Marcel can give an
indication. I have in the CollectionScanner this function replaced with
CoreDB::deleteAlbum(). It seems to work without problems. I create tonight a
patch.

Maik

--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
_______________________________________________
Digikam-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-devel

[bugzilla_noreply]

https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=363697

Maik Qualmann <[hidden email]> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Attachment #99742|0                           |1
        is obsolete|                            |

--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
_______________________________________________
Digikam-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-devel

[bugzilla_noreply]

https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=363697

--- Comment #22 from Maik Qualmann <[hidden email]> ---
Created attachment 99765
  --> https://bugs.kde.org/attachment.cgi?id=99765&action=edit
removeStaleAlbum.patch

This patch removes stale album function. Swati, you can test it please.

Maik

--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
_______________________________________________
Digikam-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-devel

[bugzilla_noreply]

https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=363697

--- Comment #23 from [hidden email] ---
(In reply to Maik Qualmann from comment #22)
> Created attachment 99765 [details]
> removeStaleAlbum.patch
>
> This patch removes stale album function. Swati, you can test it please.

The deleted album is no more visible in DK, but entry still exists in DB.
Is it the same for you?

--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
_______________________________________________
Digikam-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-devel

[bugzilla_noreply]

https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=363697

--- Comment #24 from Maik Qualmann <[hidden email]> ---
No, the entry does not exist here in the DB. Strange.

Maik

--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
_______________________________________________
Digikam-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-devel

[bugzilla_noreply]

https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=363697

Maik Qualmann <[hidden email]> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Attachment #99765|0                           |1
        is obsolete|                            |

--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
_______________________________________________
Digikam-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-devel

[bugzilla_noreply]

https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=363697

Maik Qualmann <[hidden email]> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |RESOLVED
   Version Fixed In|                            |5.0.0
      Latest Commit|                            |http://commits.kde.org/digi
                   |                            |kam/adc7a5868a10f8f21ac3b36
                   |                            |edecdd9f53f1efec4
         Resolution|---                         |FIXED

--- Comment #25 from Maik Qualmann <[hidden email]> ---
Git commit adc7a5868a10f8f21ac3b36edecdd9f53f1efec4 by Maik Qualmann.
Committed on 29/06/2016 at 20:45.
Pushed by mqualmann into branch 'master'.

disable temporary Foreign_Key_Checks
FIXED-IN: 5.0.0

M  +2    -2    NEWS
M  +2    -0    libs/database/coredb/coredb.cpp
M  +17   -0    libs/database/engine/dbenginebackend.cpp
M  +6    -0    libs/database/engine/dbenginebackend.h

http://commits.kde.org/digikam/adc7a5868a10f8f21ac3b36edecdd9f53f1efec4

--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
_______________________________________________
Digikam-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-devel

[bugzilla_noreply]

https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=363697

--- Comment #26 from Maik Qualmann <[hidden email]> ---
I think that this solution is better at the moment. I have set this problem on
my todo list, to find a clean solution for the DB.

Maik

--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
_______________________________________________
Digikam-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-devel

[bugzilla_noreply]

https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=363697

--- Comment #27 from [hidden email] ---
Maik,

Could your last patch be included before 5.0.0 ?

--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
_______________________________________________
Digikam-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-devel

[bugzilla_noreply]

https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=363697

--- Comment #28 from Maik Qualmann <[hidden email]> ---
Yes, the FOREIGN_KEY_CHECKS patch is included into git/master.

Maik

--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
_______________________________________________
Digikam-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-devel