Re: [netmod] features in import

Andy Bierman wrote: > Hi, > > I do not agree these changes should be made at this late date. > It seems to me that in order to support a feature you have to implement it, > and therefore if any features are set then the module is implemented, not > imported. But this is not what RFC 7950 says ab

Re: [netmod] features in import

Hi Martin, Andy, Despite what YANG the language allows, I think that it is much cleaner use of the language to split types/groupings that are expected to be shared by other modules into separate "*_types.yang" modules. I agree with Andy that it is strange to support a feature in a module tha

Re: [netmod] features in import

On Thu, 2019-01-31 at 10:23 +, Robert Wilton wrote: > Hi Martin, Andy, > > Despite what YANG the language allows, I think that it is much cleaner > use of the language to split types/groupings that are expected to be > shared by other modules into separate "*_types.yang" modules. But it is

Re: [netmod] features in import

On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 12:44 AM Martin Bjorklund wrote: > Andy Bierman wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I do not agree these changes should be made at this late date. > > It seems to me that in order to support a feature you have to implement > it, > > and therefore if any features are set then the modul

Re: [netmod] features in import

Andy Bierman wrote: > On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 12:44 AM Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > > Andy Bierman wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > I do not agree these changes should be made at this late date. > > > It seems to me that in order to support a feature you have to implement > > it, > > > and therefore

Re: [netmod] features in import

Hi Lada, Please see inline ... On 31/01/2019 10:41, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: On Thu, 2019-01-31 at 10:23 +, Robert Wilton wrote: Hi Martin, Andy, Despite what YANG the language allows, I think that it is much cleaner use of the language to split types/groupings that are expected to be share

Re: [netmod] features in import

On 31/01/2019 10:58, Martin Bjorklund wrote: Andy Bierman wrote: On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 12:44 AM Martin Bjorklund wrote: Andy Bierman wrote: Hi, I do not agree these changes should be made at this late date. It seems to me that in order to support a feature you have to implement it,

Re: [netmod] LL comments on draft-rwilton-netmod-yang-packages-00

Robert Wilton writes: > Hi Lada, > > Thanks for the review and comments ... > > I've added some thoughts inline ... > > On 30/01/2019 14:50, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I think it is a good start, here are my comments (some of them were >> already raised by Jason): >> >> - I like the fact

Re: [netmod] features in import

On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 2:58 AM Martin Bjorklund wrote: > Andy Bierman wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 12:44 AM Martin Bjorklund > wrote: > > > > > Andy Bierman wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > I do not agree these changes should be made at this late date. > > > > It seems to me that in o

Re: [netmod] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7950 (5617)

On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 5:45 AM Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > Hi, > > this erratum should be rejected. It is a substantial technical change of > the > spec, and section 9.9.2 doesn't indicate any possibility of using deref(). > > Yup, while it might be a good idea, it isn't an errata, and would need a

Re: [netmod] initial comments on draft-rwilton-netmod-yang-packages

On 30/01/2019 20:51, Andy Bierman wrote: On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 10:04 AM Robert Wilton > wrote: On 30/01/2019 17:31, Andy Bierman wrote: On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 8:02 AM Robert Wilton mailto:rwil...@cisco.com>> wrote: On 30/01/2019 15:16, Andy

Re: [netmod] initial comments on draft-rwilton-netmod-yang-packages

Hi, I can see some utility in a module-set artifact. Every tool has a different way of specifying a set of [module, revision, features, deviations]. The module-set has these parameters (plus other metadata) rc:yang-data module-set { container module-set { uses yanglib:module-s