[PATCH] Better solves Bug#860

[Lubomir I. Ivanov]

On 21 March 2015 at 17:21, Abhinav Agarwal <aagarwal.gtr at gmail.com> wrote:
> two questions
> 1. are we to NOT limit the user to only xml and ssrf extensions. can a user
> have any extension he likes? concurrently, are we to NOT allow the user to
> have a dot in his filename except the dot for extension?

the .ssrf and .xml are the default extensions. what Robert says is
that on export we should not limit the user as he should be able to
write:
filename.<something> and the function should still work and not append
.ssrf automatically, making it:
filename.<something>.ssrf

> 2. why was it defaulting to xml in windows when no extension was specified?
>

the default format is XML based for both .ssrf and .xml (AFAIK). i can
see it defaults to .ssrf, via:
filename.append(".ssrf");

lubomir
--