Hello all,
> That is a good thought. Not every machine requires an allocation
> name. If we would make it a required field, it would force users to
> choose something even for machine that don't need it. On the other
> hand, we could work around that by providing 'something' (notneeded?)
> for tho
On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 12:58:27PM -0400, Erik Schnetter wrote:
This looks like a good idea. We might need to update the MDB definition
as
well to make this key either required or optional (don't know which is
better).
That is a good thought. Not every machine requires an allocation name.
If
On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 11:51:08AM -0500, Roland Haas wrote:
I would like to remove the
allocation = NO_ALLOCATION
lines from simfactory's machine definition files.
I think this is fine, as long as simfactory aborts if none was set. This
would a nice improvement.
Frank
signature.asc
Des
Roland
NO_ALLOCATION was introduced for backward compatibility. Initially, most
Simfactory users used the same allocation (LSU numrel group), and we
entered this into the MDB. Later this was not a good default any more, so
we replaced it with something "neutral".
This looks like a good idea. We m
Hello all,
I would like to remove the
allocation = NO_ALLOCATION
lines from simfactory's machine definition files.
They seem to have not benefit that I can see and cause two types of
problems:
* simfactory does not default to the allocation in the [default]
section which is the only one set