-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

lol - pops out of a box somewhere... okay - that response was worth it
for that part alone.

Mind if I post to users asking version mindset? I'm still seeing 3.X
questions being raised - if there's a substantial number, I'll work on
keeping track of fixes for that so you can bulldoze ahead with the fun
stuff.

Jesse Kuhnert wrote:
> Not by me. Unless someone makes a lot of noise about them at least.
> 
> If people are still on 3.X and care enough about an issue then I hope they
> will speak up. I'm trying to not "blindly" close any old issues, but ones I
> know are definitely fixed in 4.0 > already and aren't worth anyone's time
> spending too many brain cycles on for 3.x.
> 
> That's how I feel at least :) Unless a tapestry 3 developer pops out of a
> secret box somewhere I doubt it will be getting a lot of heavy bugfix
> development...
> 
> jesse
> On 3/9/06, Brian K. Wallace <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jesse -
> 
>   I know you're a non-3.X'er, but for the issues written against 3.0 and
> fixed in 4.1 - are the fixes getting back ported where they can?
> 
> Brian
>>
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (MingW32)

iD8DBQFEEON+aCoPKRow/gARAuteAJ9xExOTULK5/YLpL7MEYUfsNS0KiACeM4V4
6ob3fdKvwMstrt/ocw9TSLU=
=KPPt
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to