Maybe this calls for some documentation in the code :-)

Greg Brown wrote:
> OK, this change has been reverted.
>  
> On Tuesday, September 01, 2009, at 08:02AM, "Todd Volkert" 
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>   
>> This actually reminds me of when these events were created.  I think this
>> point got brought up, which is why they were left in there.  They may appear
>> semantically as duplicates, but they are called at different points in the
>> lifecycle of the event, so they do add value.
>>
>> -T
>>     

Reply via email to