This is a republication of Reedo’s Naver article. It is not a new experiment or a DMS client case study. The cover and in-article photographs are AI-generated staged scenes, not evidence of actual work.
When a work folder gets large, it is tempting to delete the oldest files first. But in automation, a file being old is not the same as it being safe to delete. If the folder includes outputs that have not yet been reviewed or materials awaiting approval, clearing it out could also remove files needed for the next task.
What I shared on Threads on October 16 was a set of cleanup rules intended to reduce these risks. They were based on my work records reviewed on October 9. I kept four rules: never delete an entire folder, allow a seven-day grace period after completion, preserve files awaiting review or approval, and delete only copies that are identical to the originals.
Rather than deleting a file simply because seven days have passed, first determine whether it is an identical copy of a confirmed original that will be kept.
AI-generated staged image, not an actual work screen.
Look at the Status of Files, Not the Age of the Folder
A folder may contain both completed outputs and work in progress. It is better to identify cleanup candidates file by file rather than treating the folder as a single unit. A file should not be assumed unnecessary just because its name includes “temporary” or its modification date is old.
Here, seven days means a grace period after the work is completed, not a period automatically counted from the creation date. If a file’s completion time cannot be confirmed, even the date condition is difficult to establish. The key point in these records is to exclude files from deletion if review or approval is unfinished, regardless of how much time has passed.
Putting a file on hold does not mean the automation has failed. It is a choice to protect materials whose status is unconfirmed. When defining cleanup rules, it is useful to specify not only when to delete files, but also when to stop. In these rules, pending review and the ability to confirm an original serve that purpose.
AI-generated staged scene 2View original
AI-generated staged image, not an actual work screen.
Shortlist Candidates Before Deleting Anything
If you begin applying these rules, I recommend first making a candidate list without deleting anything. Start by selecting files whose completion status and completion time can be confirmed, check whether seven days have passed, and then exclude materials awaiting review or approval. This step narrows the scope for human judgment; it does not perform deletion.
For the remaining candidates, you can check whether an original to be kept separately actually exists and whether it opens properly. Matching file names do not guarantee matching content, so comparing the actual contents is advisable. If you cannot find the original or confirm that the files are identical, that is the point to stop and keep the file.
For example, if two files saved under the same name contain versions from before and after an edit, looking like copies is not enough reason to delete one. This is an example to explain the decision criteria, not an incident confirmed in this work. Dates and names are clues for finding candidates, not final evidence authorizing deletion.
AI-generated staged scene 3View original
AI-generated staged image, not an actual work screen.
Keep Cleanup Rules Separate from Reports of Success
The records reviewed on October 9 also noted an instruction to report the number of deleted files and the actual increase in free space separately. These two values need to be checked independently. Receiving a report that a certain number of files were cleaned up and directly checking the change in storage space are different checks. Unverified space savings should not be presented as an achievement.
This Threads post alone does not establish that automatic cleanup is currently working properly. It also provided no actual deletion count or amount of freed space. This article is therefore not a report that cleanup has been completed, but a record of preservation rules and checks set out before automatic deletion. The sequence of creating a candidate list and checking originals is also a proposal, not a procedure validated across every work folder.
In the next review, I will again distinguish between rules being saved and actual execution results. I will look at whether candidates were selected correctly, materials that needed to be kept were preserved, and both deletion records and free space were checked separately. Until proper operation is confirmed, it is also appropriate to hold off on saying that automatic cleanup is complete.
The Original Threads Post Sharing the Temporary File Cleanup Rules
If I applied this to my folders, I would first check that the candidate list, created without deleting anything, did not include materials awaiting review. I would keep files whose status is unclear and move only items supported by evidence that they are identical copies of originals to the next step. The goal of temporary file cleanup is not a high deletion count, but distinguishing unnecessary copies while protecting the materials that are still needed.
