While I agree that some directives would be better handling a subsequent directive in a diffrent way, the problem is that it would make some config file out there no longer backward compatible if we change the existing behaviour. So, we are sort of suuck with only "gees wouldn't it better if...." as the practical resolution. Yes, we could add a special keyword indicating you want replacement but it's an enormous task going through the hundreds of existing directives to make them all consistent with that approach.

—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.
Triage notifications on the go with GitHub Mobile for iOS or Android.

[ { "@context": "http://schema.org", "@type": "EmailMessage", "potentialAction": { "@type": "ViewAction", "target": "https://github.com/xrootd/xrootd/issues/1514#issuecomment-925407369", "url": "https://github.com/xrootd/xrootd/issues/1514#issuecomment-925407369", "name": "View Issue" }, "description": "View this Issue on GitHub", "publisher": { "@type": "Organization", "name": "GitHub", "url": "https://github.com" } } ]

Use REPLY-ALL to reply to list

To unsubscribe from the XROOTD-DEV list, click the following link:
https://listserv.slac.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=XROOTD-DEV&A=1