DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT <http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8654>. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8654 No ..'ing below fileset base [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Severity|Normal |Enhancement ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2003-02-13 11:54 ------- Yes, can't think why I marked it 'bug' rather than 'enhancement'. IIRC, the point I wanted to make was that the implementation is overly restricting the semantics. Conceptually, why shouldn't <fileset dir="x"> be generalized from "a set of files below x" to "a set of files whose path starts with x"? Makes perfect sense to me as a user. Imagine if bash disallowed 'ls ../*'. *Practically*, this is all marsh gas; futzing with the API would kill backwards-compat. But why let reality get in the way when filing bugreports :o) --Jeff
