I tend to agree with this statement - I mentioned this very same documentation to Jim a few months ago when you originally filed the other RT. However, we didn’t want to change the core behavior of File::Path at the time. Perhaps we should have mentioned we already knew about this conflicting documentation in the other thread which probably could have publicly led us to this point.
If we can a better sense that this is the ultimate desired behavior in File::Path I’m all for it.
Do you know if there is a feature request voting facility in place (other than ppl doing +1’s in a bug thread)?
— rich
Show quoted text> On Sep 26, 2015, at 5:35 PM, Slaven_Rezic via RT <bug-File-Path@rt.cpan.org> wrote:
>
> Sat Sep 26 17:35:26 2015: Request 107356 was acted upon.
> Transaction: Ticket created by SREZIC
> Queue: File-Path
> Subject: perlfunc.pod contradicts File::Path documentation
> Broken in: (no value)
> Severity: (no value)
> Owner: Nobody
> Requestors: SREZIC@cpan.org
> Status: new
> Ticket <URL:
https://rt.cpan.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=107356 >
>
>
> "perldoc -f rmdir" says
>
> To remove a directory tree recursively ("rm -rf" on Unix) look
> at the "rmtree" function of the File::Path module.
>
> Probably File::Path documentation should also say so (instead of currently stating that it's like "rm -r") (and make sure the behavior is also like this).
>
>
