Possibly, yet the wording should be tuned I think. E.g. failOnEmptySource or something similar instead of failOnError.

I like the way it's done by Ant: you make sure "failOnError" is on and then you know it takes care of anything that can go wrong. Being more specific may leave some error case unhandled, like empty disk, files that are too large to copy and god knows what else. It's like catching a SpecificException in a catch

block or just an Exception - I mostly prefer the second option.

But we may have them both!

Unless, of course, Gradle already handles and fails if anything goes wrong during the copy operation which leaves failOnEmptySource the only scenario left.

As announced on the Gradle blog we are planning to completely migrate issues from JIRA to GitHub.

We intend to prioritize issues that are actionable and impactful while working more closely with the community. Many of our JIRA issues are inactionable or irrelevant. We would like to request your help to ensure we can appropriately prioritize JIRA issues you’ve contributed to.

Please confirm that you still advocate for your JIRA issue before December 10th, 2016 by:

• Checking that your issues contain requisite context, impact, behaviors, and examples as described in our published guidelines.
• Leave a comment on the JIRA issue or open a new GitHub issue confirming that the above is complete.

We look forward to collaborating with you more closely on GitHub. Thank you for your contribution to Gradle!

Thanks again for reporting this issue. We haven't heard back from you after our inquiry from November 15th. We are closing this issue now. Please create an issue on GitHub if you still feel passionate about getting it resolved.