reschke commented on code in PR #362:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/jackrabbit-filevault/pull/362#discussion_r1992034954
##########
vault-core/src/main/java/org/apache/jackrabbit/vault/fs/api/WorkspaceFilter.java:
##########
@@ -102,6 +103,19 @@ public interface WorkspaceFilter extends Dumpable {
*/
boolean isAncestor(@NotNull String path);
+ /**
+ * Matches the given path with all filter roots. For each, if it is an
ancestor,
+ * add the name of the first path segment of the remaining filter root
"below" path
+ * to the result set.
+ *
+ * @param path Path to check
+ * @return first path segments of non-matched paths, or {@code null} when
result set
Review Comment:
Well - `null` is the safe approach, because it means doing exactly what we
did before.
And no, I'm not sure. I'm trying to improve one specific use case (for which
I happen to have an integration test to verify). We probably can improve more
cases, but my personal preference would be to do that when we figure out that
it's needed - for instance when the current improvement can't be applied
because there is a second completely unrelated filter.
Does this make sense?
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@jackrabbit.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org
