{"action":"created","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/datalad/datalad/issues/2946","repository_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/datalad/datalad","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/datalad/datalad/issues/2946/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/datalad/datalad/issues/2946/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/datalad/datalad/issues/2946/events","html_url":"https://github.com/datalad/datalad/pull/2946","id":373614385,"node_id":"MDExOlB1bGxSZXF1ZXN0MjI1NTAzMTI3","number":2946,"title":"BF: Reevaluation of Dataset properties","user":{"login":"bpoldrack","id":10498301,"node_id":"MDQ6VXNlcjEwNDk4MzAx","avatar_url":"https://avatars2.githubusercontent.com/u/10498301?v=4","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/bpoldrack","html_url":"https://github.com/bpoldrack","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/bpoldrack/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/bpoldrack/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/bpoldrack/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/bpoldrack/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/bpoldrack/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/bpoldrack/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/bpoldrack/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/bpoldrack/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/bpoldrack/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[{"id":488743117,"node_id":"MDU6TGFiZWw0ODg3NDMxMTc=","url":"https://api.github.com/repos/datalad/datalad/labels/needs-review","name":"needs-review","color":"b60205","default":false}],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"assignees":[],"milestone":null,"comments":15,"created_at":"2018-10-24T18:21:38Z","updated_at":"2018-11-04T13:18:52Z","closed_at":null,"author_association":"MEMBER","pull_request":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/datalad/datalad/pulls/2946","html_url":"https://github.com/datalad/datalad/pull/2946","diff_url":"https://github.com/datalad/datalad/pull/2946.diff","patch_url":"https://github.com/datalad/datalad/pull/2946.patch"},"body":"Reevaluate properties when physically underlying repo changes, ceases to exist or comes into existence.\r\nNote, that Dataset is supposed to represent a path reference to a repository that may not even exist yet, whereas *Repo classes are supposed to represent the actual repository. This leads to the Repos being flyweights wrt to realpath and Dataset being flyweight wrt the unresolved path!\r\n\r\nThere's a sideeffect to be mentioned: Previously it was possible to read/write `.datalad/config` via `Dataset.config` even if there was no repository (yet) at all. This is not the case anymore and I think this makes sense. Ultimately the previous behavior suggests, that you can store config at \"dataset-level\" (Parameter `where='dataset') while there is no dataset. This is misleading and I don't see a reason for it. However, a `Dataset` instance without an underlying physical repository still provides access to user and system level config, of course.\r\n\r\nAlso:\r\nCloses #2942 \r\n\r\n### Changes\r\n- [x] reevaluate `Dataset.repo`\r\n- [x] reevaluate `Dataset.config`\r\n- [x] reevaluate `Dataset.id`\r\n- [x] This change is complete\r\n\r\nPlease have a look @datalad/developers\r\n"},"comment":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/datalad/datalad/issues/comments/435668927","html_url":"https://github.com/datalad/datalad/pull/2946#issuecomment-435668927","issue_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/datalad/datalad/issues/2946","id":435668927,"node_id":"MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQzNTY2ODkyNw==","user":{"login":"yarikoptic","id":39889,"node_id":"MDQ6VXNlcjM5ODg5","avatar_url":"https://avatars3.githubusercontent.com/u/39889?v=4","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/yarikoptic","html_url":"https://github.com/yarikoptic","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/yarikoptic/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/yarikoptic/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/yarikoptic/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/yarikoptic/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/yarikoptic/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/yarikoptic/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/yarikoptic/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/yarikoptic/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/yarikoptic/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"created_at":"2018-11-04T13:18:52Z","updated_at":"2018-11-04T13:18:52Z","author_association":"MEMBER","body":"Sure, bring back or remove triggering for \"isoteric\" situations. I felt that many others not mentioned originally were quite warranted but that is ok, we can just wait for bug reports to add them back"}}
{"actor":{"display_login":"yarikoptic"}}