On Oct 3, 2013, at 8:04 PM, ronnie sahlberg <ronniesahlb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> There is very little overlap between samba needs and wireshark needs for PIDL.
> It is probably better to continue running two separate forks of PIDL,
> one for samba and one for wireshark.
>
> Switching to samba PIDL seems to be a lot of work for miniscule gain.
> And who will do the work?
Are you referring to forking PIDL, the language, or to forking PIDL, the tool
that translates PIDL-the-language descriptions into code for
{Samba,Wireshark,...}?
___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@wireshark.org>
Archives: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
