Ladislav Lhotka je 1.3.2016 ob 11:33 napisal:
On 01 Mar 2016, at 11:21, Jernej Tuljak <jernej.tul...@mg-soft.si> wrote:
Ladislav Lhotka je 1.3.2016 ob 10:42 napisal:
On 01 Mar 2016, at 10:38, Anton Tkáčik <anton.tka...@pantheon.tech> wrote:
Hi,
Noticed other issue with example set,
In https://github.com/mbj4668/pyang/issues/194 Lada stated that in YANG 1.0
submodule can not augment nodes
defined in parent model.
Is that correct that submodule can not augment definition defined in parent
module?
This isn't possible in YANG 1.0 but will be possible in 1.1. However, in the
present case the definition being augmented from the submodule is arguably in a
different module.
I disagree. Submodules do not see "/jbox:jukebox/jboxcd:cdcapable" in 1.0, since
"jbox:cdcapable" is a name defined in the main module. An explicit include of another
submodule doing the augmentation is needed to make their test case valid YANG. Any other case
Isn't it what I wrote? This has changed in 1.1, no includes are needed in submodules in
order to "see" definitions in the main module?
Perhaps I misunderstood. You seemed to be saying their example is still
valid 1.0, since "the definition being augmented from the submodule is
arguably in a different module".
Jernej
Lada
would mean breaking out of submodule containment, much like when we discussed
XPath expressions breaking out of module containment.
Jernej
Lada
Is such definition also augmentation.
________________________________________
Od: Ladislav Lhotka <lho...@nic.cz>
Odoslané: 29. februára 2016 17:36
Komu: Peter Verthez
Kópia: netmod@ietf.org
Predmet: Re: [netmod] Augment issue
Hi Peter,
I agree it should be OK. I tried to reproduce the situation and test it with
pyang and it led to a Python exception. So I filed an issue:
https://github.com/mbj4668/pyang/issues/206
Lada
On 29 Feb 2016, at 10:09, Peter Verthez <peter.vert...@nokia.com> wrote:
Hi all,
A few weeks ago I reported a bug on the OpenDaylight YANG parser, regarding a
error that was generated on a particular augment construction. The bug report
is the following:
https://bugs.opendaylight.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5335
We are disagreeing on the interpretation of the YANG RFC regarding to this bug,
so could we get the opinion of the people on this mailing list on it?
The problem originated from a proposed Broadband Forum model, but there's a
dummy model that reproduces the problem attached to that bug report.
Thanks,
Peter.
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
--
Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
AntonTkáčik
Chief Software Architect
Mlynské Nivy 56 / 821 05 Bratislava / Slovakia
+421 911 309 249 / anton.tka...@pantheon.tech
reception: +421 2 206 65 111 / www.pantheon.sk
[logo]
--
Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
--
Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
