As everyone will see ... I reverted. Its not the end of the world if
this gets in since I can easily maintain a private version with alias
support for myself. I thought it was a helpful bloatage for others. It
might be worthwhile keeping the discussion active for the moment if
anyone else has opinions.
-Tim
Costin Manolache wrote:
My understanding was that veto can only be against a patch.
And for a feature - some majority would do it.
Regarding feedback on patch - I think I expressed my concerns:
- more analysis and understanding of security implications
- if possible to do it at a different (higher) level
- if it can be done in a modular fashion, i.e. keeping the default impl the
way it is,
without this feature, and adding a way to configure a different module with
this or
other features. ( bonus points if the add-on module is a separate release
and very easy
to add )
In other words - bloat ( same as Remy's concern I guess) and understanding
if this is the
best possible implementation if the bloat is deemed acceptable.
Costin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
