Mike, certain things in this life cannot be delayed. That includes patches for rapidly evolving software artifacts in my opinion ;-) Oleg
On Wed, 2003-02-26 at 15:03, Michael Becke wrote: > > I do remember about it. In fact, in my initial post you have been > > personally mentioned to be among those impacted most by the suggested > > patch ;-) Had not the patch been turned down, I was going to approach > > you for suggestions on HttpClient improvement. > > > > I guess we will have to refactor HttpMethodBase HttpClient at a point > > of > > time after 2.0 release. We will definitely be in need of your feedback > > I would say delayed not turned down:) > > It seems that we should put some work in fixing up HttpClient to entice > people to use it. This way when 2.x has made direct use of HttpMethods > unwise people will have already moved to HttpClient. Perhaps we need a > quick brainstorming session with all involved. > > Mike > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
