David Wheeler wrote: > On Jul 31, 2004, at 5:04 PM, Stas Bekman wrote: > >>> I guess losing the skip message by making need_ functions that >>> replace the existing have_ functions is okay. It's most important >>> that tests continue to pass... >> >> >> They will. > > > Then I say we go with need.
I kind of favor this as well - it's really no big deal that have functions will all of a sudden stop printing a skip message, and in doing so it will encourage users that care to upgrade to the new function. --Geoff
