We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Something like
{ "path" : "/content/someContent", "excludePaths" : [ "subPath1", "subPath2/xyz" ], }
To keep things clear/simple, the excludePaths should only allow relative paths to the path for that block. For example the following would be illegal:
excludePaths
path
{ "path" : "/content/someContent", "excludePaths" : [ "/content/otherContent", "/content/someContent/apath" ], }
An open question: Should "." be legal?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I guess . would effectively be a no-op right (especially if we only allow sub-paths)? If so, I think we could go eitherway. Legal or Illegal.
.
no-op
Sorry, something went wrong.
To work with specifics; given the following path structure:
/a /a/b /a/c
How would you express the following?
/a
I expect it would like
{ "path": "/a" }
{ "path": "/a", "excludePaths": ["."] }
{ "path": "/a/." }
{ "path": "/a", "excludePaths: ["*"] }
No branches or pull requests
Something like
To keep things clear/simple, the
excludePaths
should only allow relative paths to thepath
for that block. For example the following would be illegal:An open question: Should "." be legal?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: