On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 8:58 AM Eli Zaretskii <
eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
This use case raises an interesting question: what should be the
behavior of delete-by-moving-to-trash when the Trash directory already
includes a directory by the same name as the non-directory file being
deleted? Are files in the Trash directory generally unimportant
enough to disregard these situations, or does this use case run afoul
of the ability to restore the trashed files later?
The fact that the user deleted the files means that the files were not important. If the user deleted them by mistake, then the trash serves as a last-resort to restore the files from. Trash is not a "backup".. so unlike the Emacs backup, there shouldn't be a need to store multiple revisions of trash.
IMO, if a file or a directory exists by the same name in trash, the move-file-to-trash should just overwrite that.. if a foo file already exists and a foo/ dir is being trashed, then just delete the old trashed foo file and replace with the newly trashed foo/ dir.