Although it might be a solution in general, it might go unused but for your use-case @muink. Perhaps there is a better way to capture config?

This seems OK in general. Opinions from others? @hnyman @stokito @dannil ?

I've tried a few other solutions, but they are all too heavy. This is currently the simplest stupidst solution I can come up with.
And uci can store duplicate lists, it would be strange if luci can't do that.

The change is small and seems reasonable. Maybe we can find other places were the duplicate property is needed? Just to have a better understanding. Because now I think that we can just remove the check for a duplicates, or show a confirmation to a user when adding a duplicate.

@systemcrash The word "duplicate" is an action so maybe call it "duplicates" or even "allowDuplicates" or "duplication"?

This seems OK in general. Opinions from others? @hnyman @stokito @dannil ?

I'm fine with it, the semantics of a list is to allow duplicates anyway, otherwise you're dealing with sets, and since it doesn't break existing default functionality I don't see any problem.

Hi @muink - please rename the setting to allowduplicates. I like @jow-'s suggestion from the linked ticket (and @stokito's above), and it's what I would settle on also, since the name makes clear what the boolean value hinges on (and that duplicates is a plural noun).

force pushed.