DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT <http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28320>. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28320 copy task preserving permissions ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-04-20 09:07 ------- 1. yes, we could unprotect the access. 2. But you point to a better way. The FileUtils() stuff was meant to be exensible, which is why the methods are not static. Instead everyone has to go new FileUtils.doSomething(); So, we could provide a means to name the factory object used to create the fileutils instance, and from then on everyone who asks for one, gets the new one. That would be very slick. It would give you what you want with minimal changes to the rest of ant. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
