On 07/18/2013 07:24 PM, John Johansen wrote:
On 07/18/2013 01:02 PM, Jamie Strandboge wrote:
On 07/17/2013 05:57 PM, John Johansen wrote:
On 07/11/2013 12:55 PM, Christian Boltz wrote:
v2 policies can stay
as v2 until we test them under v3 and then have them in both. I think
we need to do it
On 07/11/2013 12:55 PM, Christian Boltz wrote:
Hello,
Am Mittwoch, 10. Juli 2013 schrieb Jamie Strandboge:
On 07/10/2013 04:18 PM, John Johansen wrote:
So it turns out we are going to need to support policy versioning
(Christian can gloat now).
I already wanted it when we enforced the
Hello,
Am Mittwoch, 10. Juli 2013 schrieb Jamie Strandboge:
On 07/10/2013 04:18 PM, John Johansen wrote:
So it turns out we are going to need to support policy versioning
(Christian can gloat now).
I already wanted it when we enforced the trailing / on directory names
some years ago ;-)
So it turns out we are going to need to support policy versioning (Christian
can gloat now). The question because how we support it
We are looking at 2 different options
1. we support a version tag in files, with the tag required to be on each
file including any include.
When the parser
On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 02:18:22PM -0700, John Johansen wrote:
So it turns out we are going to need to support policy versioning (Christian
can gloat now). The question because how we support it
I'm pretty sure I've seen a matrix somewhere that described the different
mediation semantics and
On 07/10/2013 04:18 PM, John Johansen wrote:
So it turns out we are going to need to support policy versioning (Christian
can gloat now). The question because how we support it
We are looking at 2 different options
1. we support a version tag in files, with the tag required to be on each
On 07/10/2013 02:51 PM, Seth Arnold wrote:
On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 02:18:22PM -0700, John Johansen wrote:
So it turns out we are going to need to support policy versioning (Christian
can gloat now). The question because how we support it
I'm pretty sure I've seen a matrix somewhere that
