Re: Discussing r8708 for 1.0.x

On Mon, May 10, 2004 at 02:13:01PM -0500, kfogel@collab.net wrote:
> "Erik Huelsmann" <e.huelsmann@gmx.net> writes:
> > Since before 1.0.1 r8708 has been nominated in STATUS and at the same time
> > being vetoed by breser pending discussion.
> >
> > Could we have that discussion now in order to be done before 1.0.3 (whenever
> > that is), or remove it from STATUS as non-essential?
>
> +1 on removing it. I don't see any reason such a change belongs in a
> 1.0.x release.

I just never got around to doing the new change. We pretty much had the
discussion and we came up with a way to do it the new way in newer perls
and the old way in the older perl versions. I'll commit the change.

I'm not going to worry about backporting it to 1.0.x since we're going
to do 1.1.0 soon.

-- 
Ben Reser <ben@reser.org>
http://ben.reser.org
"Conscience is the inner voice which warns us somebody may be looking."
- H.L. Mencken
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org