Hi!
On Mar 29, 2011, at 2:06 PM, Trond Norbye wrote:
> I don't see it as that big problem that we've got an actual implementation we
> may discuss, instead of sitting down discussing every tiny little bit up
> front. We did that for the rget commands, and AFAIK no one has ever provided
> an implementation for those commands.
I think it would be nice to see at the very least a note to the mailing list
saying "this what is planned, this is how we think it will work". It would be
very nice, and probably for the best, if there is a reference implementation
provided. I am not for having long drawn out discussions, but some notice
before changes hit trees is a good idea.
I had the impression that 1.6 was close to release, but if that is not the case
then it is no big deal that none of the bits have been mentioned on the mailing
list. If 1.6 is close to release? Then I believe some basics docs should be
sent out so that there can be some record of what the changes are supposed to
do.
Cheers,
-Brian
