On Thu, 21 Feb 2002 06:18, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I'm not sure what 'backward compatiblitity' cannot be preserved. > What works today will still work - the proposal is just making some > enhancements ( like adding 'named loaders', defining some conventions > to construct and use the named loaders ). > > It can be easily implemented (almost) independently of the current > core, with little refactoring and adding of some hooks. That > means it would be easy to switch back to the old loader, if > you want 100% compatibility ( including bugs ). > > It may not solve all the current problems, but I think it > can solve most of them.
So when are we going to see a patch from you ? Les stalk more coding ;) -- Cheers, Pete "Man's mind stretched to a new idea never goes back to its original dimensions." -Oliver Wendell Holmes -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
