Community
Participate
Working Groups
This also my work as designed... it just seems strange Install root 1.0.0 Install root 1.0.1 Enable root 1.0.0 things look more or less good with Root 1.0.0 having XYZ&Bogus 1.0.1 as a child Disable 1.0.1 Root 1.0.0 still has XYZ&Bogus 1.0.1 as child.. is that expected ? Disable Root 1.0.0 Enable Root 1.0.0 Enable Root 1.0.1 Bogus, XYZ and XYZ&Bogus are considered root feature as they were not disabled by latest action... is that working as designed ?
When 'match' is used, care must be taken with enabling and disabling root features of different versions. In your particular scenario, there would be no problems if the order was reversed i.e. if Root 1.0.1 was disabled first, then Root 1.0.0 enabled (or revert was used to get to the previous state). We should probably document this in a readme. In general, users should avoid 'enable' action that causes more than one version of the same feature to be active at the same time.
Ok, post 2.0.2 should we provide a 'replace with another version' ? or at leats provide the ability to disable the enabled version ?
defer
[LATER->WONTFIX] The "LATER" bugzilla resolution is being removed so reopening to mark as WONTFIX.
