3 ms·
I think it's possible to avoid using symlinks and just use plain folders to represent tags only. By using a special naming strategy on the folders themselves,
by fouc 5y ago
I think it's possible to avoid using symlinks and just use plain folders to represent tags only. By using a special naming strategy on the folders themselves, it would be possible to have a set of scripts for "tagging" files and operating on them. Tagging would be equivalent to just moving the files into the relevant nested tag directories.
No duplicate files or symlinks necessary.. Can make scripts like tagcd and tagls to make it work.
- alpaca128 5y agoI don't think that would scale. The nested directory structure could reach a depth equivalent to the number of tags to support all combinations. Meanwhile with symlinks you only need one folder per tag and it can be comfortably used with file browsers.
- fouc 5y agoIf there was a limit of 10 tags per file, then the max depth would be 10 folders.
- alpaca128 5y agoWith <20 tags per file you could just use the filename and not worry about more than filtering a bit using `find -iname`. With a filename limit of 255 bytes (Linux) that would still be ~12 characters per tag on average. I'd prefer not to worry about such limits though, with some files that don't allow full-text search it can be useful to have more.