Lars Gullik Bj�nnes wrote:
> | But we HAVE people using 1.2.0cvs in their work, don't we?
>
> To be a bit rude: "That is their problem, and is the danger of living
> on the edge."
>
Just like to say that I, for one, understand that. I don't particularly
mind fixing up 1.2.0cvs docs that change with a changing API. The
problem is that I don't know if it is a new bug or an intentional
change, or a combination of the two. In any case, I think the observed
change in behaviour needs to be communicated to the list.
Garst
