Yeah, it's a "will be nice to have", but nobody is being blocked by not havingit right away.
On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 3:19 PM, P T Withington <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I vote for deferring this, given the complexity of the fix. > > > On 2008-10-02, at 10:37EDT, Donald Anderson wrote: > > Well this is sad - I thought I was going to have plenty of time to finish >> this, >> but more testing has revealed some flaws - this has happened a few times >> now, >> I thought I was on the final rewrite. There were some (minor) lfc source >> changes needed, >> along the way, that may be part of the problem. Anyway, it's looking like >> I won't finish this in time >> for code freeze today, but I'll keep working on it. It will need a >> careful review also - and I want to be >> sure in all the tests I run. >> >> It doesn't feel like a 'critical' bug to me, let me know if I'm wrong. If >> I should be working on >> something else instead in the meantime, let me know also. >> >> - Don >> >> -- >> >> Don Anderson >> Java/C/C++, Berkeley DB, systems consultant >> >> voice: 617-547-7881 >> email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> www: http://www.ddanderson.com >> >> >> >> > -- Henry Minsky Software Architect [EMAIL PROTECTED]
