Liz, I'm still not 100% sure I understand your use case now ;-)
Would you mind providing a simplified sample listing of the files in your directory before <delete>, the XML snippet for the <delete> tag with its nested elements you're using, and which files you expect to get deleted? I'm a bit puzzled that you mention that your empty dirs seem selected by looking at the debug output, yet are not deleted. --DD On 5/8/06, Liz Burke-Scovill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 5/8/06, Dominique Devienne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > In your first example, your empty dirs are implicitly included, and > and later not excluded, so <delete> will get rid of them. > > In your second example, your include pattern prevent the empty dirs > from being selected, because they don't match your pattern, so they > can't be deleted (the exclude patterns don't matter). *nod* Which I'd thought about - however, then, it would appear that the *only* point to "includeemptydirs" is that it's used as a flag to indicate a false condition and only usable in the event that an exclude patternset is present. In that case, it should be documented as such...and it probably should have been named "excludeemptydirs" ;) The fact that some directories might become empty once all the files > you wanted deleted are gone is of no concern to <delete>, as currently > implemented. *grin* _as currently implemented_ being the point. My question more revolves around the necessity of it being implemented this way - which doesn't seem to make much sense from a usage standpoint, even if it makes sense logically from an implementation standpoint. <delete> only concerns itself with the files (files or dirs) selected > by the filesets it operates upon, so if the "empty" dirs you want > deleted are not listed by these filesets (use debug mode to see the > files selected), they won't be deleted. *nod* debug does list the files selected, but it doesn't open up the logic behind it. I can't get subversion to access the latest code at the moment due to firewall policies, so I'll try and look at it this evening to get a clearer understanding of the hows and whys. Why is this important? (At least to me - and at least one other person ;) ) In the situation where you are trying to clean up a tree, and an inclusion patternset is the most reasonable way to go, you still want to be able to clean up empty directories rather than letting them stand. I'm sure there are other reasons, but this one is the most relevant to my current situation. Using an exclusion pattern set would probably work, but it would be somewhat hacky considering that simply based on naming conventions, using an includeemptydirs would just make sense. Thank you! Liz -- Imagination is intelligence having fun... [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
