Thanks Reinhard for the link. Ehm, from what I see there, there is no need/deeper meaning for moving to Resettable. Or did I oversee something?
Carsten > -----Original Message----- > From: Reinhard Poetz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, December 05, 2003 1:24 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Compatibility Issues with 2.2 > > > see > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=xml-cocoon-dev&w=2&r=1&s=recyclable+rese > ttable&q=b > (especially Berin's comments) > > Cheers, > Reinhard > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Geoff Howard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Friday, December 05, 2003 1:19 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: Compatibility Issues with 2.2 > > > > > > Carsten Ziegeler wrote: > > > So, is anyone against reverting back to Recyclable? > > > If not, I will do it in the next days. > > > > I thought there was a deeper difference than semantic but > > assumed that someone (Berin?) would pipe in and explain. > > > > If you've looked into it carefully and think that's it, I > > agree with you. > > > > Geoff > > > > > > > >>-----Original Message----- > > >>From: Vadim Gritsenko [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >>Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 3:32 PM > > >>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >>Subject: Re: Compatibility Issues with 2.2 > > >> > > >> > > >>Carsten Ziegeler wrote: > > >> > > >> > > >>>Vadim Gritsenko wrote: > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>>>I've got couple of questions... > > >>>>(1) Was Recyclable deprecated or not? > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>> > > >>>afaik, no. > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>>>(2) Can we implement both? > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>> > > >>>This could be a dangerous road, I think. What should happen if a > > >>>component implements both? > > >>> > > >>> > > >> > > >>You are asking me??? Ask the guys who invented Resettable! :) > > >> > > >>Vadim > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
