On 2017-04-05 15:34, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
hi Angela,
On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 3:18 PM, Angela Schreiber <[email protected]> wrote:
...Does no reply mean that everyone agrees with the proposed steps? :-)...
I missed it but as an Oak user +1 to the below suggestion, it makes
things clear ;-)
...
I somehow missed it as well.
That said, I agree that locking is broken, and making the proposed
change will at least surface any code that relies on locking.
I assume you're considering this change for trunk only? And what do we
do with the existing incomplete implementation? Do you want to remove it
altogether?
Best regards, Julian
