Nathanael Nerode <neroden@twcny.rr.com> writes:
> brane said:
> >This is of course totally wrong. The set of predecessors -- or rather,
> Brane is of course totally wrong, and for that matter rather offensive.
>
> I hope that other people on the list will take a closer look at what I
> proposed, since it's quite easy to implement before 1.0 and impacts
> nothing else.
Whups! :-)
Sorry, Nathanael, I must confess that I didn't read your earlier
proposal carefully. Can you repost it, or refer us to the original
message? I tried tracking backwards in the thread, in the mailing
list archiver, but I didn't know which message to land on.
With all the long threads going on, it's very easy to miss proposals
for simple improvements that have a low risk of being bug sources or
making the code harder to maintain. If this is one of those, we don't
want to miss it.
If your proposal has lots of thread-specific context in it, or other
tangents, please clean those out and post as simple a description as
possible. The more immediately comprehensible it is, the greater the
chance of its being comprehended.
(By the way, I don't think Brane meant to be abrasive in his post, he
just tends toward jocularity. Hang around a while longer and you'll
see what I mean; in the meantime, don't take offense.)
-Karl
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Dec 20 07:05:34 2002