commons-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Philippe Poulard <>
Subject Re: [POLL][VFS] how to resolve relative filenames
Date Mon, 29 Aug 2005 14:42:10 GMT
> [X] Use URI style
> [ ] Keep current behaviour

people that vote for the second choice should consider this :
are your applications really impacted ?
i don't think so ; as you're already dealing with files, their name 
should *never* end with "/" (that would be somewhat astonished that you 
hope that a file ending with a "/" would NOT behave like a directory for 
resolution) ; in the same way, if you create a directory, you would 
expect that a resolution is made from it, not from its parent (which is 
the case today) !!!

this modification is just saying that a FileObject that is reputed to be 
a directory will resolve a relative path from its name, not from its parent
FileObject that is reputed to be a directory :
-its name ends with "/",
-or .createDirectory() has been used,
-or the file has been resolved upon the underlying file system 
(attach()ed) and IS a real directory,
-or anything else that states that type of the FileObject is a DIRECTORY)

notice that URI resolution is scheme independant and applies only on 
FileName, not on FileObject (VFS doesn't need to attach() the file to 
the underlying file system to lookup by itself if it is a real file or 
directory, except if a user explicitely attach() the file)

> [X] Minimum jdk 1.4
> [ ] Minimum jdk 1.3

ideally, VFS could use jdk 1.4 classes if they exist, and fallback 
classes if not :)


           (. .)
|   Philippe Poulard    |

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message