On 6 February 2012 17:45, Mladen Turk <mt...@apache.org> wrote: > On 02/06/2012 05:16 PM, sebb wrote: >> >> On 6 February 2012 16:05, Mladen Turk<mt...@apache.org> wrote: >>> >>> On 02/06/2012 05:02 PM, sebb wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> On 6 February 2012 15:25, Mladen Turk<mt...@apache.org> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I don't, but since its there, so be it. >>>>> >>>> >>>> OK, in that case what's needed is to decide whether the current >>>> behaviour should be fixed and documented or just documented. >>>> >>> >>> You mean with DAEMON-240? >> >> >> Yes. >> >>> Resolved just about now. >>> Having --foo and ++foo on the same command line will cause >>> procrun to exit with error. >> >> >> Well, that resolves the problem, but might cause some scripts to >> break, so should be highlighted in the release notes. >> > > Hmm, right. I'll revert the patch. There should be no surprises > or new features with 1.0.x branch. > Think that --foo=a ++foo=b ++foo=c should behave like > If there was foo set, set to a b c, not add a b c.
Agreed; new patch (r1241101) looks good. > > > > Regards > -- > ^TM > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
