-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Aug 25, 2008, at 1:53 PM, Fredrik Lundh wrote: > Barry Warsaw wrote: > >> I agree. This seriously feels like new, potentially high risk code >> to be adding this late in the game. The BDFL can always override, >> but unless someone is really convincing that this is low risk high >> benefit, I'd vote no for 2.6/3.0. > > at least two Unicode experts have stated that they don't think the > changes are that important. determining exactly what the changes to > the *core* character database was the whole point of my offer to > tinker with this. You don't mean the experts claimed they weren't important, right? Unimportant changes definitely don't need to go in now <wink>. - -Barry -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin) iQCVAwUBSLMCSHEjvBPtnXfVAQKgLwP/YlrqcdlmoeBsK9JdJMnxkgN92L1K86cg lzvQT6bv8vda64Su8bV81UT+NdoB+/ZGpZ1t+Dn4Z0uvB0uaVrZZ7uOUoqQTkvG7 yrj/Clbedi2v35vYjudqAaZyBnJtz+V0rH8tdgpDVU5zILSK4gQm385nFuoUXQpC iJlqok3tjuU= =YfQR -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
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