Shared Mime spec: overriding globs locally

[Alexander Larsson]

On Wed, 2009-04-08 at 12:02 +0200, David Faure wrote:
> On Wednesday 08 April 2009, Alexander Larsson wrote:
> > On Tue, 2009-03-31 at 20:42 +0200, David Faure wrote:
> > > On Thursday 26 March 2009, Alexander Larsson wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 2009-03-26 at 11:30 +0100, David Faure wrote:
> > > > > What's the next step? I can provide a patch for the spec, but I have to rely on you
> > > > > guys to do the code changes.
> > > 
> > > Patch for the specification attached, please review.
> > > 
> > > > Are there really much code changes required? 
> > 
> > What are the ordering behaviour of these nodes?
> > For example in this:
> > 
> >     <glob pattern="*.foo"/>
> >     <glob deleteall="true"/>
> >     <glob pattern="*.bar"/>
> > 
> > Is foo deleted or not?
> >
> > Since deleteall is a attribute of glob, one could do:
> > 
> >     <glob deleteall="true" pattern="*.foo"/>
> > 
> > Is this allowed?
> 
> You're right, this is all a bit fishy.
> 
> > Maybe we should have a <glob-deleteall> node instead to avoid these
> > issues? It would translate in the same way as the above in the files.
> 
> Good idea indeed. And then order doesn't matter, this node means
> delete globs from previous dirs, not delete any globs found here, even if
> it comes after <glob> elements, right? That seems sensible to me.

Yes, that seems better.

Want to update your patch?