Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Should packages support optional packages/modules? #133

Open
rgwilton opened this issue Feb 22, 2022 · 1 comment
Open

Should packages support optional packages/modules? #133

rgwilton opened this issue Feb 22, 2022 · 1 comment
Assignees
@rgwilton
Labels
packages YANG packages related issue propose-closing There is a proposal to close the issue with no further changes.

Comments

@rgwilton
Copy link
Collaborator

This issue is being actively discussed.

Do we need both optional packages and optional modules?

Would it be helpful to have more levels of optionality (e.g., equivalent to MAY, SHOULD, MUST)?
@rgwilton rgwilton added the packages YANG packages related issue label Feb 22, 2022
@rgwilton rgwilton self-assigned this Feb 22, 2022
@rgwilton
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Based on the discussion on 8th Oct meeting, we decided to try and keep the package definitions as simple as possible. Hence the proposal is to close this, at least, at this time, and for the initial release. This could be re-opened in future, once more experience has been gained defining YANG packages.

@rgwilton rgwilton added the propose-closing There is a proposal to close the issue with no further changes. label Oct 14, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@rgwilton rgwilton

Labels
packages YANG packages related issue propose-closing There is a proposal to close the issue with no further changes.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
1 participant
@rgwilton