Return-Path: 
 <dev-return-194590-apmail-lucene-dev-archive=lucene.apache.org@lucene.apache.org>
X-Original-To: apmail-lucene-dev-archive@www.apache.org
Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-dev-archive@www.apache.org
Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3])
	by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 553B6172EA
	for <apmail-lucene-dev-archive@www.apache.org>;
 Wed,  4 Feb 2015 18:21:24 +0000 (UTC)
Received: (qmail 80643 invoked by uid 500); 4 Feb 2015 18:21:24 -0000
Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-dev-archive@lucene.apache.org
Received: (qmail 80574 invoked by uid 500); 4 Feb 2015 18:21:24 -0000
Mailing-List: contact dev-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Help: <mailto:dev-help@lucene.apache.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@lucene.apache.org>
List-Id: <dev.lucene.apache.org>
Reply-To: dev@lucene.apache.org
Delivered-To: mailing list dev@lucene.apache.org
Received: (qmail 80564 invoked by uid 99); 4 Feb 2015 18:21:24 -0000
Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 04 Feb 2015 18:21:24 +0000
X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=5.0
	tests=SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS
X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of uwe@thetaphi.de designates
 85.25.204.22 as permitted sender)
Received: from [85.25.204.22] (HELO mail.sd-datasolutions.de) (85.25.204.22)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 04 Feb 2015 18:21:20 +0000
Received: from VEGA (unknown [IPv6:2001:1a80:2b02:aa01:8e70:5aff:fed1:75a4])
	by mail.sd-datasolutions.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BFA3616F806E0
	for <dev@lucene.apache.org>; Wed,  4 Feb 2015 18:20:58 +0000 (UTC)
X-NSA-Greeting: Dear NSA, have fun with reading and analyzing this e-mail!
From: "Uwe Schindler" <uwe@thetaphi.de>
To: <dev@lucene.apache.org>
References: <044c01d04059$7aa49da0$6fedd8e0$@apache.org>
 <CAOdYfZWXD2QJ3REecM3EmqHEa6BzFUkC=a=H4dorDEn1EtoiLw@mail.gmail.com>
 <005e01d04084$f88f8380$e9ae8a80$@thetaphi.de>
 <CAOdYfZXJOb844oeeGsTVnSts5Awy+wR5m7hzFmQnboAF7pJVzQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <00f801d040a6$1dcff0a0$596fd1e0$@thetaphi.de>
 <CAOdYfZXVGeCZj9Jy+1+2vP9JQ1BvE-y=9xWozzOpk-C3oCT81Q@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAOdYfZXVGeCZj9Jy+1+2vP9JQ1BvE-y=9xWozzOpk-C3oCT81Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: RE: FSDirectory and creating directory
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2015 19:20:57 +0100
Message-ID: <010501d040a7$528469b0$f78d3d10$@thetaphi.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: 
 AQK1DeErtIuxQOTwpvEVxZdq5oX47gKy2GwXAoHZlp4CVEClOwIq4ny6Au09J+uasim+YA==
Content-Language: de
X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org

> On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 1:12 PM, Uwe Schindler <uwe@thetaphi.de> wrote:
> > Hi Robert,
> >
> > I am fine with any of your comments. We can move this issue to later
> releases, I just want that FSDirectory and its subclasses to document =
that
> they create the directory on its ctor if it does not yet exist. Please =
understand
> that I want to figure out if this could cause "human" issues, because =
I know
> people are always complaining about this shit. And I also wanted to be =
sure
> this causes no problems with read-only filesystems. People will for =
sure
> complain if they just want to open an indexreader and suddenly the
> FSDirectory complains about "I cannot write" instead of "Directory =
does not
> exist". I understand the reason behind this change: we want the "real"
> (canonical path), so NativeFSLockingFactory's stupid internal =
Set<Path>
> works correctly. No worry, I don=E2=80=99t want to change that for 5.0 =
- only
> document it! But we can think in later Lucene releases to go back to =
not
> creating the directory on front under read-only conditions (opening an
> IndexReader).
> >
> > Should I add those Javadocs, costs me not much, I just wanted to =
check this
> out before?  In fact I would move the comment you added to the =
Javadocs of
> ctor and open() with an additional sentence.
>=20
> I don't mind if you change the javadocs, or handle exception from
> Files.createDirectories() differently (e.g. in case creation fails).
>=20
> Just remember, people will for sure complain if they just want to open =
an
> indexwriter and make a new index and suddenly FSDirectory complains
> about "Directory does not exist" instead of "I cannot write"
>=20
> :)

I will just change the Javadocs, so nobody can complain about that.
I also removed the bogus comment in 4.10 - which claimed the opposite =
what really happened. This caused most trouble, because the Lucene.NET =
people did not understand what was going wrong there and they tried to =
implement what the comment said. And to me it was also a "WTF?" issue =
:-)

Uwe


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org