Re: Issue 2897 revisited. Really.

Karl Fogel <kfogel@red-bean.com> writes:
> By the way, the more I ponder this, the more I think it makes sense to
> defer (2) until 1.6. But *only* assuming that the work we do for (1)
> is a subset of what we need to do for (2).
>
> So the real question is: do you see anything happening for (1) that
> works against (2), or that would need to be reverted when we do (2)?

Please ignore this mail; we crossed in the pipe. David Glasser and I
have been chatting in IRC for a long time about this problem just now,
and I'm going to go off and ponder for a bit. More soon.

-K

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Nov 29 00:11:08 2007