Hi Attila, [...]
> i need to run now, and i'll be offline for a week or two. i can't look > the example in depth now, but my gut instinct says that it's a bug if > *unspecified* reaches any GExp machinery. I don't think it's reasonable to burden users with normalizing their G-exp input data, where *unspecified* may appear in nested data structures (such as used by the jami-service-type: jami-accounts has maybe fields end is used as a nested data type to jami-configuration). I think v3 of this patch enables us to continue with our current ways and is a non-invasive change, so I'll merge it soon if there are no objections. Thanks, Maxim
