Details
-
Bug
-
Resolution: Fixed
-
Critical
-
Cheshire-Cat
-
Untriaged
-
1
-
Unknown
Description
Seems that rules like the following set is valid:
s1.c1 -> s1t.c1t
s1.c2 -> s1t.c1t
When we should really enforce a 1-to-1 mapping (i.e. no N-to-1 nor 1-to-N is allowed)
Currently, 1-N rule is not valid per mapping rules.