Re: authz changes between 1.9 and 1.10

2018-12-05 Thread Julian Foad
Branko Čibej wrote: >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/7IjQBQ > > It is starting to improve. I'll be grateful to anyone who cares to take > a look to debug the syntax BNF. I appreciate the right-bracket rule change is in that domain. Could I nevertheless encourage you to jump ahead to

Re: authz changes between 1.9 and 1.10

2018-12-05 Thread Branko Čibej
On 05.12.2018 14:27, Julian Foad wrote: > Branko Čibej wrote: >>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/7IjQBQ >> It is starting to improve. I'll be grateful to anyone who cares to take >> a look to debug the syntax BNF. > I appreciate the right-bracket rule change is in that domain. > > Could I

Re: authz changes between 1.9 and 1.10

2018-12-05 Thread Branko Čibej
On 05.12.2018 14:27, Julian Foad wrote: > Branko Čibej wrote: >>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/7IjQBQ >> It is starting to improve. I'll be grateful to anyone who cares to take >> a look to debug the syntax BNF. > I appreciate the right-bracket rule change is in that domain. > > Could I

Re: authz changes between 1.9 and 1.10

2018-12-05 Thread Julian Foad
Branko Čibej wrote: > Yes, but I'm asking for a review of the BNF to make sure that it doesn't > contain silly bugs. At first glance, I saw what looks like a bug: it says a comment must have a non-white-space immediately after the '#'... I didn't review further. -- - Julian

Re: authz changes between 1.9 and 1.10

2018-12-05 Thread Branko Čibej
On 02.12.2018 17:28, Branko Čibej wrote: > On 02.12.2018 16:49, Branko Čibej wrote: > Seriously though: I started this document > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/7IjQBQ > Yes, it's empty. It will improve. It is starting to improve. I'll be grateful to anyone who cares to take a look to

Re: authz changes between 1.9 and 1.10

2018-12-05 Thread Branko Čibej
On 05.12.2018 14:44, Julian Foad wrote: > Branko Čibej wrote: >> Yes, but I'm asking for a review of the BNF to make sure that it doesn't >> contain silly bugs. > At first glance, I saw what looks like a bug: it says a comment must have a > non-white-space immediately after the '#'... I didn't

Re: authz changes between 1.9 and 1.10

2018-12-05 Thread Branko Čibej
On 05.12.2018 14:59, Branko Čibej wrote: > On 05.12.2018 14:44, Julian Foad wrote: >> Branko Čibej wrote: >>> Yes, but I'm asking for a review of the BNF to make sure that it doesn't >>> contain silly bugs. >> At first glance, I saw what looks like a bug: it says a comment must have a >>

Re: authz changes between 1.9 and 1.10

2018-12-05 Thread Julian Foad
Branko Čibej wrote: > On 05.12.2018 14:44, Julian Foad wrote: > > Branko Čibej wrote: > >> Yes, but I'm asking for a review of the BNF to make sure that it doesn't > >> contain silly bugs. > > At first glance, I saw what looks like a bug: it says a comment must have a > > non-white-space

Re: authz changes between 1.9 and 1.10

2018-12-05 Thread Branko Čibej
On 05.12.2018 15:05, Julian Foad wrote: > Branko Čibej wrote: >> On 05.12.2018 14:44, Julian Foad wrote: >>> Branko Čibej wrote: Yes, but I'm asking for a review of the BNF to make sure that it doesn't contain silly bugs. >>> At first glance, I saw what looks like a bug: it says a