Quoting Henning Brauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 02:31:15PM -0500, Dan Melomedman wrote:
> > Henning Brauer wrote:
> > > On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 11:07:30AM -0800, Justin Ainsworth (isp-lists) wrote:
> > > > I second that motion.  :-)
> > > 
> > > 
> > > I do not.
> > > 
> > > now everybody, please!
> > > nah, this is no democracy, ok?
> > 
> > Is this a code quality issue?
> 
> I don't think the concept of just moving the files into one LDIF each is
> even close to optimal.

No one (not even me) have argued this. Until someone come up with a better
alternative, we can use what we have. This is ususally how development works
in ANY dicipline. It's FULLY 'turn-offable' at compile time, so it doesn't
COST anything (more than a few extra bytes to download the patch) to anyone,
only gives benefits to those (few?) that use it...


No one have even ATTEMPTED to come up with a better alternative (not even
teoreticly!!) so take what's at hand. I have a working version, you don't even
have a theoretical one.
-- 
jihad NSA ammunition tritium Ft. Bragg quiche subway Soviet president
munitions iodine Mossad Rule Psix SEAL Team 6 North Korea
[See http://www.aclu.org/echelonwatch/index.html for more about this]

Reply via email to