Matthew T. O'Connor <matthew@zeut.net> said: > I think it will be necessary. It's folly to think that everyone > converting to 2.1 will have a database with a correctly populated > is_header field. Besides since the work was already done adding it to > HEAD should be easy, and you never know if it might be needed to correct > a bug in the insertion code or something.
Good points, you have me sold. Except... > Short answer is, I can't see how this could hurt. It precludes multiple header blocks. I think this is OK, but want to make sure that everyone is aware of it. Aaron
