Jan Stary <[email protected]> wrote: > On Jun 02 07:16:52, [email protected] wrote: > > Your diff completely breaks a majority of the ways people use it. > > Does that mean people mostly use > the undocumented obsolete syntax > that obsolete() keeps supported?
It means at least 1 person use that option code, which was the dominant option code for multiple decades, and you propose to simply delete it. I'm sorry to break your bubble, but the old option code has to remain. What is needed is a simple documentation addition. Probably as simple as saying that at least one option must be specified before the path.
