Kalnichevski, Oleg wrote:
As you know, I have a very relaxed oppinion of breaking API
compatibility. I am in favour of this change.
Same here. But I have to admit we might be a minority on this issue
You know, the Swiss like votes, and democracy :-)
Anything I can help here?
Only to help me
few remaining issues to be discussed before we cut 3.0a1
Oleg Kalnichevski wrote:
> (1) Since this release is going to be incompatible with 2.0 API anyways,
> I suggest HttpException be changed to derive from Exception and not
> IOException.
As you know, I have a very relaxed o
Oleg Kalnichevski wrote:
(1) Since this release is going to be incompatible with 2.0 API anyways,
I suggest HttpException be changed to derive from Exception and not
IOException.
As you know, I have a very relaxed oppinion of breaking API
compatibility. I am in favour of this change.
(2) I no lon
(1) Since this release is going to be incompatible with 2.0 API
anyways,
I suggest HttpException be changed to derive from Exception and not
IOException. The only reason for not making a clear distinction between
protocol exceptions (derived from HttpException) and transport
exceptions (derived fr
Folks,
We are basically two bug reports away from the target for the 3.0a1
release. We are damn close. Before we cut the release, I feel there is a
few issues to be discussed first.
(1) Since this release is going to be incompatible with 2.0 API anyways,
I suggest HttpException be changed to deriv
