On 30 Mar 2010, at 1:18 AM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
As it turns out that the optional behaviour is the current default
behaviour, and because you were not aware of this when you made your
suggestion above, it is necessary for the option to become
IncludeStrict
instead of IncludeOptional.
The default behavior of -trunk-. Right now, nobody has voted that
trunk is
in an appropriate state for general availability. The default
behavior of
2.2 is that only filename wildcards are allowed to not-match.
That's because directory wildcards aren't supported in v2.2 at all and
never were. You cannot claim that functionality that was never there
somehow affirms a particular behaviour one way or another.
The basic fact remains, you thought the default behaviour of the
server was that a file no-match returned an error, and I too thought
that until saturday, when I spent a whole lot of time trying to pick
apart what was going on to resolve your veto. In the light of your
original understanding, a veto made perfect sense - if a file no-match
returned failure, then directory no-match should too return failure,
to be consistent, non confusing for the end user, and to follow the
principle of least surprise.
Then it is uncovered that the default behaviour of the server was the
complete opposite: the default behaviour of v2.2 and trunk is that
file no-match returns success. And yet you stuck to your guns, even
though all the reasons that supported your original veto were now
reversed. In the process, you are now arguing for inconsistent
behaviour, that is confusing for the end user, and that violates the
principle of least surprise.
No, you haven't; you have inflicted your desire of a new feature in
such a way
that the typical user will be confused, and would be disrupted by
their own
fat fingers in such a way as they would not be able to decipher the
reason for
this failure without re-reading and fully comprehending their
configuration
character-by-character, something I watch users fail at on a weekly
basis.
The original patch was contributed to solve a significant amount of
real actual pain for a large amount of real actual people caused by a
hack that was put in place on one of the UK's largest web platforms,
the solution being to remove the hack and to just do the job properly
in the first place. I am sure all these people will be overjoyed to
hear your solution to this problem is to just not make this capability
available on v2.2.
Regards,
Graham
--
