Hi Robert,
excellent. Thanks for pointing me to the right spot. I read through the
thread and Igor seems to find the perfect words to express what I am
thinking for a long time... Great to see that Brian is with him...
So I assume that no such plugin has been started yet.
I will try to create
Hi Baptiste,
> Hi,
IIUC, you're talking about the injection difference that may be introduced
between an absent and empty tag.
Yes you hit the nail on the head...
If so, then by the way, the current situation is even worse than that :
putting "*"* or "* "* results by default in
the same th
Hi,
IIUC, you're talking about the injection difference that may be introduced
between an absent and empty tag.
If so, then by the way, the current situation is even worse than that :
putting "*"* or "* "* results by default in
the same thing: considered unspecified, and so null (or default-value
+1 (binding)
-Stephen
On 17 February 2014 01:13, Jason van Zyl wrote:
> Cool. No dire rush.
>
> On Feb 16, 2014, at 2:31 PM, Stephen Connolly <
> stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Jason, FYI I intend testing tomorrow AM (GMT). Expect my vote by noon/1pm
> > GMT
> >
> > On Sunday, 1
Hi,
I have taken a deeper look into the above issue...
In short:
If finalName is defined in configuration the name should be left
empty...But here the problem is that the injection mechanism says ok
the finalName is empty so we use the default value...
From my point of view it looks l
