Re: Renames (Gee, it's a mail from thom, it must be renames)

2002-11-23 Thread William A. Rowe, Jr.
At 01:27 PM 11/20/2002, Jim Jagielski wrote: >At 4:59 PM -0800 11/19/02, Thom May wrote: >>So what is the consensus with the renames? The patch is available from >>http://cvs.apache.org/~thommay/full-rename-diff and seems good - it builds >>and passes tests on (at least) BeOS and OS X. >>Also, http

Re: Renames (Gee, it's a mail from thom, it must be renames)

2002-11-20 Thread Jim Jagielski
At 4:59 PM -0800 11/19/02, Thom May wrote: >So what is the consensus with the renames? The patch is available from >http://cvs.apache.org/~thommay/full-rename-diff and seems good - it builds >and passes tests on (at least) BeOS and OS X. >Also, httpd and svn don't need any changes to still work - t

Re: Renames (Gee, it's a mail from thom, it must be renames)

2002-11-20 Thread Jeff Trawick
Thom May <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > So what is the consensus with the renames? The patch is available from > http://cvs.apache.org/~thommay/full-rename-diff and seems good - it builds > and passes tests on (at least) BeOS and OS X. > Also, httpd and svn don't need any changes to still work - th

Re: Renames (Gee, it's a mail from thom, it must be renames)

2002-11-20 Thread Aaron Bannert
+1, it built fine for me on Darwin. -aaron On Tuesday, November 19, 2002, at 04:59 PM, Thom May wrote: So what is the consensus with the renames? The patch is available from http://cvs.apache.org/~thommay/full-rename-diff and seems good - it builds and passes tests on (at least) BeOS and OS X. Al

Renames (Gee, it's a mail from thom, it must be renames)

2002-11-20 Thread Thom May
So what is the consensus with the renames? The patch is available from http://cvs.apache.org/~thommay/full-rename-diff and seems good - it builds and passes tests on (at least) BeOS and OS X. Also, httpd and svn don't need any changes to still work - the functions are all wrapped by the old names.