Re: Patch for supporting TYPE=USER for PPG

> Georg von Zezschwitz wrote:
>   
>> Stipe Tolj wrote:
>>     
>>> ...
>>> Can't we think a bit to have "multi-directives" with the same name in
>>> a group?
>>>
>>> Obviously we would have to tweak the gwlib/cfg.[ch] here ;)
>>>       
>> I think this is an architecture issue, and I leave it to you in deep
>> respect :-)
>>
>> If we have "multi-directives", I'd be lucky to use them...
>>     
>
> come on, you're just in the mood for submitting patches, go on :))
>   

OK, I looked at it.

What I would do is
  - adding a MULTIPLE to cfg.def and cfg.c, meaning that multiple values 
might be
    specified.
  - adding a WARNING (or should I panic?) if multiple definitions of the 
same field
    are occuring but the field is declared as OCTSTR.
    (currently, a redefinition silently overwrites the old value - this 
makes
    it probably difficult to find mistakes for the user), .
 - store a List instead of an Octstr for all MULTIPLE fields.
 - replace cfg_get_list by a variant returning a list if the field is of 
type MULTIPLE

This *IS* touching architecture - does everyone agree?

Best regards,


Georg

> Stipe
>
> - -------------------------------------------------------------------
> Kölner Landstrasse 419
> 40589 Düsseldorf, NRW, Germany
>
> tolj.org system architecture      Kannel Software Foundation (KSF)
> http://www.tolj.org/              http://www.kannel.org/
>
> mailto:st_{at}_tolj.org           mailto:stolj_{at}_kannel.org
> - -------------------------------------------------------------------
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
> iD8DBQFGJ3uh9ez0oeKvYs0RAmeDAJsE9gfczxM8dB0jVPydmfKyVJwg6wCg1RBy
> 0y0+eX7g4qZRyL0gWveLMlQ=
> =6GyL
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>