From: "William A. Rowe, Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, February 11, 2002 8:24 PM
> Going back to take two... > > I'm reviewing and committing so changes to occur fairly shortly don't create > extra hassles later applying these patches. > > Some are trivial, some are very close to rights. I'm committing those > tonight. > > Some need more review. I'm uncomfortable with one aspect or another of your > choices in porting in such module patches - so I'll post questions to the > list and your attention on those points. But that takes significantly more > time to either reassure myself they are fine-as-is, or post the question on > how we should approach them. > > Some are outright wrong. I'll post those as well with detailed explanation > of the underlying issues. Again, it takes more time than I have tonight. I should have added a last category, before you panic. There are a number of the WinCE patches which make me question the design or correctness of the existing apr code. Those patches I myself will do all the correction work while fixing the underlying bogosity we had when you started hacking WinCE :) Bill
