On Wed, 2009-10-14 at 08:33 +0200, Michael Matz wrote: > So, why not just move them to dead-branches now, and be done with it?
OK, your argument has convinced me. :-) Cheers, Ben
On Wed, 2009-10-14 at 08:33 +0200, Michael Matz wrote: > So, why not just move them to dead-branches now, and be done with it?
OK, your argument has convinced me. :-) Cheers, Ben