ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Conor MacNeill" <>
Subject RE: deprecate deltree ?
Date Sat, 17 Jun 2000 09:20:36 GMT

We have actually discussed this in the past. Arnout made a suggestion about
rationalising the whole move/delete/copy operations. I have appended the
resulting discussion below. The direction is clear - we should
deprecate/remove deltree and extend delete to cover the deletion of a
directory tree.

Here is our previous discussion:
> > One question, will you retain deltree? If not, how do you distinguish
> > between deleting the contents of the directory and deleting
> > the directory
> > AND its contents?
> deltree should not be retained because of duplication. The new delete
> task also covers the current deltree funtionality (see case 1 below).
> The proposal for the new delete task includes the functionality of
> the current deltree and delete tasks, and extends it with recursing
> through a directory, to be able to remove only files that match a
> pattern. This way, the basic file operations (copy, delete, and move)
> work more or less the same.
> We can distinguish between the two cases mentioned before:
> <delete dir="somedirectory"/>
> without includes and excludes will delete the directory AND contents
> (makes sense, if you want to delete the directory, you want to include
> all its content).
> <delete dir="somedirectory" includes="..." excludes="..."/>
> (thus with includes and/or excludes) will delete the contents of the
> directory, but not the directory itself (makes also sense, if you want
> to include and exclude files from deleting, you don't want the
> directory itself to be removed).
> To the last case, an attribute can be added to allow the directory to
> be deleted when it is empty (e.g. deletewhenempty="true"). But I think
> that this will not be used very often.
> Cheers,
>   Arnout

Conor MacNeill

View raw message