Re: Duplicate entries, posted by David Pilgram on Wed Dec 2 15:57:25 2020
|
I'm not sure if this is what you want.
If you want to prevent "accidental" replies being identical to the original message, you can force a situation where the user will
be alerted that they have to do something if they really want to make a reply. |
|
Re: Duplicate entries, posted by Harry Martin on Wed Dec 2 17:54:51 2020
|
I was only commenting on the predicament as I have run into it also. I have required fields, but short of some sort of "abort" control
(curiously missing from the otherwise vast offerings of elog), I don't see any way to ensure that identical replies don't occur in any circumstance
that may arise. |
|
Re: Duplicate entries, posted by David Pilgram on Wed Dec 2 18:22:37 2020
|
Hi Harry,
I'm just an elog (ab)user, not one of the developers. My original 2017 reply was to report an issue that was due to hardware, but somehow
overcame a configuration flag (no multiple replies to a single entry), which might have been the same problem as the original poster, Alan Grant, was observing, |
|
Re: Duplicate entries, posted by Harry Martin on Wed Dec 2 22:13:52 2020
|
David
Pilgram wrote:
Hi Harry, |
length of condition names, posted by Harry Martin on Wed Dec 2 22:45:16 2020
|
The documentation describing the use of conditionals uses a single character (letter or number) for names of conditions. I don't see any update/change
to that rule anywhere in the docs.
I have been using multi-character condition names successfully. I find these are easier to use since they can be more descriptive |
|
Re: Options <...> vs ROptions <...>, posted by Harry Martin on Thu Dec 3 01:51:49 2020
|
Same problem here, in version 3.1.3. It would be very nice if this worked.
Wolfgang
Bayer wrote:
According to section "Syntax of elogd.cfg" of the "Administrator's |
|
Re: length of condition names, posted by Stefan Ritt on Thu Dec 3 09:57:20 2020
|
You can easily use multi-character conditionals, up to 256 chars.
Harry
Martin wrote:
The documentation describing the use of conditionals uses a single |
|
Re: Options <...> vs ROptions <...>, posted by Stefan Ritt on Thu Dec 3 09:58:44 2020
|
For conditional attributes, you have to use Options, not ROptions. Maybe I will implement that one day, but only if I will have plenty of time...
Harry
Martin wrote:
Same problem here, in version 3.1.3. It would be very |