Specification: Should globbing be included as a server-side feature?
Currently, the much-contentious Globbing mechanism is marked 'at risk' on the existing spec.
As part of the 1.0 spec we should decide its fate (either continue marking it at at-risk, or, preferably, decide one way or another).
Related issues:
dmitrizagidulin
All 5 comments
1.0 should either include or exclude features; not have any at risk.
As for globbing, I strongly feel we should exclude it for reasons mentioned in the above threads, which also link to a 10-line client-side alternative I wrote.
RubenVerborgh
on 24 Sep 2019
My vote is: +1 to what @RubenVerborgh said.
dmitrizagidulin
on 24 Sep 2019
Agree on exclusion. IMO - this has lingered for a long time when there are legitimate alternatives and it鈥檚 a good time to move from at risk to excluded in the next major version.
justinwb
on 24 Sep 2019
Then I hereby conclude to _not_ include globbing, unless any objections come up. (Since there is no text to be reviewed for _not_ adding a feature, there is nothing more we can do process-wise.)
RubenVerborgh
on 2 Oct 2019
Moved to "Done". IIRC; it is possible to automated that in the project board.
kjetilk
on 7 Oct 2019
Related issues
QuadrupleA
路
5Comments
michielbdejong
路
11Comments
csarven
路
7Comments
justinwb
路
5Comments
acoburn
路
3Comments
Most helpful comment
1.0 should either include or exclude features; not have any at risk.
As for globbing, I strongly feel we should exclude it for reasons mentioned in the above threads, which also link to a 10-line client-side alternative I wrote.