On Wed, 28 Sep 2005, Matt Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- Stefan Bodewig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> On Tue, 27 Sep 2005, Matt Benson >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> > I'd like to revisit this after your changes are >> > committed. >> >> Sure. > > This was RE Copy/filesystem only. I agree that move should work > this way. We don't know how to move non-file resources. We do know > how to copy non-file resources. I would think we could also sync > them... but that would be later.
I agree, the way I patched sync should make any change to copy work transparently for sync as well. > Now, accepting that we have these protected ( >:( ) members to > support, I suppose my chosen approach would be to duplicate the file > maps as private resource maps w/ protected accessors. Yes, something like this. If you look into Expand and Untar I've done something along those lines. I kept the protected File based signatures and added new ones for Resource which throws an exception in Expand but works in Untar. > Then we change the copy logic to call some form of > FileUtils.copyResource(). ResourceUtils ... > Holes? No, should work. Stefan --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
