On Wed, 27 Feb 2002 19:34, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Feb 2002, Peter Donald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > * FileSet is a set
>
> of existing files, agreed.
I disagree. A FileSet created from one of the existing scanners probably
requires this but it is not inherent in the concept or the implementation
that I can recall.
> If we want to extend it to a more general set, that is fine with me,
> but we'll have to rewrite lots of tasks as they rely on the "existing"
> bit above.
Not if they still aquire the fileset from scanners.
> > Hence we end up having extensions of Fileset to apply transformation
> > rather than a nested element. ie the Tarfileset has attributes to
> > apply a set of permissions to fileset.
>
> I wouldn't call this a transformation of the set, maybe this could be
> handled by a different concept <decorator> or something similar.
Maybe - I vaguely recall coming up with another name that you didn't mind in
the past ... hmmm forget it atm ;)
> What I'm trying to stress is that <tarfileset> (which could be a
> <fileset> with a nested <decorator> that adds permissions) still
> consists of existing files, while a set that has been transformed by a
> <mapper> doesn't give the same guarantee - and it shouldn't.
Well I guess I disagree ;) See above. That may be the current implementation
but there is nothing inherent in it that requires this.
--
Cheers,
Pete
"You know what a dumbshit the 'average man' on the street is? Well, by
definition, half of them are even dumber than that!"
J.R. "Bob" Dobbs
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
