Steve Holden wrote:
> Anthony Baxter wrote:
>> On Friday 08 September 2006 18:24, Steve Holden wrote:
>>> I agree it's a relatively large patch for a release candidate but if
>>> prudence suggests deferring it, it should be a *definite* for 2.5.1 and
>>> subsequent releases.
>>
>> Possibly. I remain unconvinced.
>>
>
> But it *is* a desirable, albeit new, feature, so I'm surprised that you
> don't appear to perceive it as such for a downstream release.
And unlike 2.2's True/False problem, it is an *environmental* feature, rather
than a programmatic one.
So while it's a new feature, it would merely mean that 2.5.1 works correctly
in more environments than 2.5.
Cheers,
Nick.
--
Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan at gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia
---------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.boredomandlaziness.org
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4