New issue
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
Can "revision-label" be used in include? #20
Comments
As I remember we sad that include/belongs-to is a much more
strict relationship then import. For this reason a strict
date-based include should be enough.
Who needs more work anyway ? :-)
regards Balazs
On 2019. 06. 10. 15:15, Robert Wilton
wrote:
Can a revision-label be used instead of a revision-date in
"include" or "import specific revision"?
Or do we just defer this to a new version of YANG (e.g. track
as part of YANG.Next)? [My preference]
Or do we define separate extension statements [I'm not keen on
this]
—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this
thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.
[
{
"@context": "http://schema.org",
"@type": "EmailMessage",
"potentialAction": {
"@type": "ViewAction",
"target": "#20?email_source=notifications\u0026email_token=ACFRA6HRNYBRVQ5VWRAKMALPZZHYVA5CNFSM4HWTNICKYY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFUVEXG43VMWVGG33NNVSW45C7NFSM4GYSAPFQ",
"url": "#20?email_source=notifications\u0026email_token=ACFRA6HRNYBRVQ5VWRAKMALPZZHYVA5CNFSM4HWTNICKYY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFUVEXG43VMWVGG33NNVSW45C7NFSM4GYSAPFQ",
"name": "View Issue"
},
"description": "View this Issue on GitHub",
"publisher": {
"@type": "Organization",
"name": "GitHub",
"url": "https://github.com"
}
}
]
…--
Balazs Lengyel Ericsson Hungary Ltd.
Senior Specialist
Mobile: +36-70-330-7909 email: Balazs.Lengyel@ericsson.com
|
I agree with Balazs, suggest |
Agreed that this can be done in a future version of YANG, but not now. |
Can a revision-label be used instead of a revision-date in "include" or "import specific revision"?
Or do we just defer this to a new version of YANG (e.g. track as part of YANG.Next)? [My preference]
Or do we define separate extension statements [I'm not keen on this]
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: