is the [DetectAds] rule for [sweeper] correct?

[hairy_mutley]

Is the second built-in sweeper rule for detectads correct?

global bookmarks 0 !flag Addetection !textmatch %channel~~BBC* !detectadsq "" action detectads

I am running it on a nested set of directories. One directory has 4 files only one of which has detectads not been run on, yet once it finds this file it appears to schedule all 4 files for processing.
Here is the result of a test run of the rule

24/03/2016 22:22 - ==== folder /media/My Video/6Main/Ugly House to Lovely House with___ ====
24/03/2016 22:22 -
24/03/2016 22:22 - --- Considering /media/My Video/6Main/Ugly House to Lovely House with___/Ugly House to Lovely House with____20160324_1958.ts
24/03/2016 22:22 - Processing [bookmarks 0 !flag Addetection !textmatch %channel~~BBC* !detectadsq {} action detectads]
24/03/2016 22:22 - bookmarks(0)
24/03/2016 22:22 - MATCH
24/03/2016 22:22 - !flag(Addetection)
24/03/2016 22:22 - MATCH
24/03/2016 22:22 - !textmatch(%channel~~BBC*)
24/03/2016 22:22 - Textmatch (%channel) against (BBC*)
24/03/2016 22:22 - Expanded [%channel] -> [Channel 4 HD]
24/03/2016 22:22 - MATCH
24/03/2016 22:22 - !detectadsq()
24/03/2016 22:23 - DetectAds Q search result: Not found
24/03/2016 22:23 - MATCH
24/03/2016 22:23 - action(detectads)
24/03/2016 22:23 - ACTION: detectads() [1]
24/03/2016 22:23 - Applying action to recordings in /media/My Video/6Main/Ugly House to Lovely House with___
24/03/2016 22:23 - + folder_apply processing /media/My Video/6Main/Ugly House to Lovely House with___/Ugly House to Lovely House with____20160310_1959.ts
24/03/2016 22:23 - Queuing /media/My Video/6Main/Ugly House to Lovely House with___/Ugly House to Lovely House with____20160310_1959.ts for detectads
24/03/2016 22:23 - + folder_apply processing /media/My Video/6Main/Ugly House to Lovely House with___/Ugly House to Lovely House with____20160324_1958.ts
24/03/2016 22:23 - Queuing /media/My Video/6Main/Ugly House to Lovely House with___/Ugly House to Lovely House with____20160324_1958.ts for detectads
24/03/2016 22:23 - + folder_apply processing /media/My Video/6Main/Ugly House to Lovely House with___/Ugly House to Lovely House with____20160303_1959.ts
24/03/2016 22:23 - Queuing /media/My Video/6Main/Ugly House to Lovely House with___/Ugly House to Lovely House with____20160303_1959.ts for detectads
24/03/2016 22:23 - + folder_apply processing /media/My Video/6Main/Ugly House to Lovely House with___/Ugly House to Lovely House with____20160317_1959.ts
24/03/2016 22:23 - Queuing /media/My Video/6Main/Ugly House to Lovely House with___/Ugly House to Lovely House with____20160317_1959.ts for detectads
24/03/2016 22:23 -
24/03/2016 22:23 - ==== folder /media/My Video/6Main/100k House_ Tricks of the Trade ====

 

[MymsMan]

af123 is supposed to making changes to sweeper to correct the processing of global rules,
currently if the first file in the directory matches the rule is applied to ALL files in the directory

In the meantime I will remove global from the rule definition in the package

 

[hairy_mutley]

af123 is supposed to making changes to sweeper to correct the processing of global rules,
currently if the first file in the directory matches the rule is applied to ALL files in the directory

In the meantime I will remove global from the rule definition in the package

af123 ... any possibility of resolving this so that MymsMan can restore the rule? Please.

 

[af123]

af123 is supposed to making changes to sweeper to correct the processing of global rules,
currently if the first file in the directory matches the rule is applied to ALL files in the directorye

That's how it's supposed to work, there is nothing to /correct/ there. folder rules (and by extension global ones) are supposed to apply to the entire folder as a single entity - criteria are tested against a single candidate file from the folder.

I need to review this to see if it can be changed without breaking it for anyone, or perhaps to introduce a new type of rule that does what you need.

 

[MymsMan]

As discussed here I don't think a change would break the existing uses

 

[Black Hole]

I don't think that behaviour is intuitively obvious. Each individual case should be tested and acted on according to the rule set for the folder.