server iteration

[Tod Oace]

For some reason I had it in my head that copy:'s  
server=server1:server2 iteration would give me failover type  
functionality. But when I tried it I discovered that while it does  
failover very nicely to server2 when server1 is available, it also  
uses server2 even if server1 is available. Iteration, not failover.

Does anyone use the server= iteration? I'm not seeing how it would be  
used the way it currently works. Changing it to stop at the first  
successful server seems much more useful to me.

I'm aware of copy:'s failover= field, but it seems like I would have  
to double my quantity of copy statements and add a whole bunch of  
AddInstallable definitions in order to use it. Seems awkward. I just  
want it to use one of a list of servers.

--
Tod Oace, Intel Corporation <tod@intel.com>