[utils] do not copy nix_name annotation to different object types

[JuliaSprenger]

solves #936

[samuelgarcia]

Hi Julia.
Fixing this here is OK but doing this we inject very specific IO stuf into cor/utils.
I am super happy with this.
And moreover, if a user inject annotation in between object by itself the problem will still be here.

Could it be possible instead to make "annotation cleaner" inside NixIO before writting to remove annotation that have the wrong "type" ?

[JuliaSprenger]

Hi Julia.
Fixing this here is OK but doing this we inject very specific IO stuf into cor/utils.
I am super happy with this.

Did you maybe forget a not in this sentence?

And moreover, if a user inject annotation in between object by itself the problem will still be here.

Yes if the user manually messes with the nix specific annotations, then the resulting nix file will be inconsistent, removing annotations of the wrong type wouldn't prevent this...

Could it be possible instead to make "annotation cleaner" inside NixIO before writting to remove annotation that have the wrong "type" ?

For now I will refactor the cleaning of the annotations into a separate utility function, then maybe when updating the nixio we can incorporate it there each time when writing to disk.

[samuelgarcia]

Did you maybe forget a not in this sentence?

Yes as you guess I gorgot the negation....

For now I will refactor the cleaning of the annotations into a separate utility function, then maybe when updating the nixio we can incorporate it there each time when writing to disk.

Ok.
Shal we merge so ?

[pep8speaks]

Hello @JuliaSprenger! Thanks for updating this PR. We checked the lines you've touched for PEP 8 issues, and found:

There are currently no PEP 8 issues detected in this Pull Request. Cheers! 🍻

Comment last updated at 2021-07-09 12:33:45 UTC

[JuliaSprenger]

For now I will refactor the cleaning of the annotations into a separate utility function, then maybe when updating the nixio we can incorporate it there each time when writing to disk.

I did the refactoring in this module. @samuelgarcia Does this look better to you?

[samuelgarcia]

This lookfs good.