I agree.

Having the same option represented 2 different ways can break a lot of stuff... 
and it's just confusing.

Why exactly did it need to be changed?

Not sure I understand where this came from...


On 11/29/11 4:17 PM, Sven Roederer wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> in r29355 a patch was made to accept the "option enable" and "option 
> enabled" in config-file.
> Since r29167 the "option enable" was renamed to "option enabled". This 
> change caused luci-app-openvpn to not show up the correct state (see 
> ticket #10473).
> 
> I think it's not the smartest way to have two options for the same 
> parameter. 
> 
> I've already written a small patch to fix the luci-issue, will test it now 
> and can submit tomorrow. 
> I don't know if there are still more interfaces to other packages 
> regarding the "option enable(d)", but may be we should cut the tail and do 
> a clean cut, the building the  bridge (r29335).
> 
> So I suggest to revert this patch and include the luci-app-openvpn-patch.
> 
> 
> King regards 
> Sven
_______________________________________________
openwrt-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel

Reply via email to