Tim Ruppert wrote: > My fellow committer has his terseness in response - but I have to admit that > I'd rather have him consistently call that spade a spade not too because he's > just too busy to help to do it right ... Completely new implementations are > one thing, but when you're replacing existing functionality we've got to have > more dedication to earlier collaboration IMO.
Huh? You're english leaves much to be desired. Could you rewrite that in a more intelligible way? I couldn't quite parse it. (I think I get the gist of what you are saying, but there are ways it could be misunderstood, and it would be nice to have those cleared up)
