On 2023-03-16 17:44:28, Jonathan Cameron wrote: <snip> > > Should it inherit the common binding, or was it omitted for a reason? > > Harmless but little point as far as I can see given we don't happen > to have any of the generic elements defined in the generic channel > binding. Supposedly the reg property, and now also the node name. Up to you to say whether I should inherit this (and strip out the common bits) or just focus on renaming the node name in the existing binding to channel. - Marijn
