You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Some of our use cases require the Remove() function to return an EPERM error.
Like RemoveDirectory(), I think removeFile() should be exposed and keep Remove() for use when the developer doesn't know if the resource is a file or a directory.
I tried to create a branch and a Pull Request but I don't have permissions
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I intended to close the PR, not this issue thread. Discussion about this topic can occur here perhaps better than the PR.
But I will quote my comment from there:
I’m kind of averse to this. We probably shouldn’t have exposed RemoveDirectory in the first place. As it seems it was exported as a least-change work-around for an issue people were seeing, but a more robust solution would have been to properly address the out-of-spec situation.
In the linked issue, I covered what the correct solution should be, I just haven’t had time to implement it.
Some of our use cases require the Remove() function to return an EPERM error.
Like RemoveDirectory(), I think removeFile() should be exposed and keep Remove() for use when the developer doesn't know if the resource is a file or a directory.
I tried to create a branch and a Pull Request but I don't have permissions
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: