-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 773
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Unix commands vs. fs-extra functions #753
Comments
I'm not interested in following specs for command-line *nix tools. The assumption probably comes from our function naming; also this could be improved: Line 4 in a6b1a44
|
Yeah I'm not interested in following specs neither! I just wanna make sure it is clear for our users that we don't follow any specs and they shouldn't expect |
Do you want to submit a docs PR for this? Feel free to improve the npm description while you're at it. |
Looking closer,
Should we remove these statements, or clarify that they're similar, but not the same? |
@manidlou bump |
I would say we remove them (I am still fine if you guys decide to edit them to be clear) but I don't understand how this would be helpful to users because they are ultimately different implementations and I think keeping them in the docs still leave some confusion around this! |
Something that I keep seeing in users' comments is that users expect
fs-extra
functions to have the same behavior/implementation as unix commandscp, mv, rm...
.At least, I couldn't find anywhere in the docs that specifies we follow unix or posix or any other specs.
I think it is a good idea to clarify this for our users. So my question is, what should we do here? Should we follow some specs or we should specify in the docs that we don't follow any specs?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: