One "bug", one feature request

[masken]

Hi

Thanks for BRU, it's awesome. The only thing I've tried that compares is NameWiz. I've with use found your tool better though, and on top of it - free

I use the Numbering feature for renaming my photos. I've discovered that if I rename wrong, and want to update the same files - adjusting the serie with an increment within the same range, BRU throws warnings that a file name with the same name already exists.

Example:
001.jpg
002.jpg
003.jpg
004.jpg

Renumber to:
002.jpg
003.jpg
004.jpg
005.jpg

If I set the numbering to start on 002 instead of 001, BRU will then throw warnings 3 times, as it finds 002-004 when renaming.

Guess it can't be classified as a "bug", but it can surely be worked around using temp files or arrays that resorts the naming order so that no file gets the same name

The feature request is presets to create "web-safe" file/folder names. Perhaps also DOS-compliant names.

[Admin]

Hi,

No, it's not a bug. When the rename occurs, there is genuinely a filename which already exists - as the rename operation always takes place in the sequence the files are listed.

You could always reverse your file list, and use the autonumber to count down instead of up.


Jim

[masken]

Yes, I realize it doesn't really qualify technically as a bug, but the end user experience is that it's a bug.

A work around to avoid that the application generates a name that is already present (just because of the renaming order), BRU could work with temporary file names.

If often find myself renaming photo number series on files within the same folder because a file has been added or removed. This causes real annoyance

[Admin]

Temporary filenames cause their own issues though. For a start, I'd have to read through the entire list twice - once to change to temporary names and then once to change to the new names. Also, this causesits own problems, if, for example, the rename fails part way through. As it stands at least the user can see which ones have been renamed and which have not, but if temporary names are used then they could end up with a folder full of temporary names, and no way to reconcile them with the original names.

If temporary names were used, BRU would also have to be prepared to rename folders and subfolders to temporary names etc. My head hurts just thinking about it

Don't get me wrong, I understand the issue. I'm just not sure that there's a sensible solution.