On 1/7/08, Adam Jacob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 1/7/08, Jason Kohles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > It's also kind of a pain. I use log4perl with Catalyst, but without > > the plugin, primarily for three reasons: > > Patches are gladly accepted, especially if they make things better, > and don't break backwards compatibility.
I know, replying to myself isn't a good sign.. But, does this mean I also accept patches that suck and do break backward compatibility? English, a tricky thing. Adam -- HJK Solutions - We Launch Startups - http://www.hjksolutions.com Adam Jacob, Senior Partner T: (206) 508-4759 E: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ List: [email protected] Listinfo: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/catalyst Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/
