|
Ashwken
I guess part of the question is what is the role of a duplicate rather than a copy.
An example, as I conceive it, is as follows: I have a yearly diary I have created in UR, with a directory for each month, and sub-directories for each day of the month.
If I copy (clone) this, thereby creating a link between the two copies, then anything I put in one diary will be reproduced in the second copy of it and vice-versa. However, if I want one diary for one purpose and a different diary for another, I can merely duplicate the original diary and I then know that changes in one are not reproduced in the other.
Now, of course, one would probably create the second diary using the copy/duplicate command, or by creating a template. But in a situation where one had inadvertently created a copy (ie clone) rather than a duplicate, it is useful to know how to get rid of the link so as to turn the clone into a mere duplicate.
So I think the question of how to get rid of links is a good one.
=========
As an aside, I would say that there would be less confusion if copying was described as cloning, and duplicating described as copying.
=========
As a further aside, I think it would be useful if copies in the recycle bin automatically lost their linking capability. I often find it irritating that a link persists despite a deletion, until I remember the link is to the recycle bin. If one has to get into the habit of always permanently deleting things, the befefit of the recycle bin becomes partly lost.
|