Fabien COELHO wrote:
>
> Dear Bruce,
>
> > > > > (1) Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2004 17:36:55 +0200 (CEST)
> > > > > Subject: [PATCHES] aclitem accessor functions
> > > > Would you repost and we can review it again.
>
> > > > > (2) Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2004 19:35:57 +0200 (CEST)
> > > > > Subject: [
Dear Bruce,
> > > > (1) Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2004 17:36:55 +0200 (CEST)
> > > > Subject: [PATCHES] aclitem accessor functions
> > > Would you repost and we can review it again.
> > > > (2) Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2004 19:35:57 +0200 (CEST)
> > > > Subject: [PATCHES] 'information_schema' considere
Fabien COELHO wrote:
>
> > Patch applied. Thanks.
>
> I have 3 others somehow minor patches that are being submitted:
>
> (1) Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2004 17:36:55 +0200 (CEST)
> Subject: [PATCHES] aclitem accessor functions
I thought Peter didn't like it. Would you repost and we can review it
> > (1) Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2004 17:36:55 +0200 (CEST)
> > Subject: [PATCHES] aclitem accessor functions
>
> I thought Peter didn't like it.
He asked 'why' I needed it. I answered his question.
He may or may not agree, I don't know!
> Would you repost and we can review it again.
Ok.
> > (2)
Fabien COELHO wrote:
>
> > > (1) Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2004 17:36:55 +0200 (CEST)
> > > Subject: [PATCHES] aclitem accessor functions
> >
> > I thought Peter didn't like it.
>
> He asked 'why' I needed it. I answered his question.
> He may or may not agree, I don't know!
>
> > Would you repost a
> Patch applied. Thanks.
I have 3 others somehow minor patches that are being submitted:
(1) Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2004 17:36:55 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: [PATCHES] aclitem accessor functions
(2) Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2004 19:35:57 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: [PATCHES] 'information_schema' considered a
