On Tue, 27 Feb 2001, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2001 8:39 AM > > > > I agree that lighting a fire is a good thing, but I would personally > > rather see one or two APR patches from him first. I haven't really been > > paying any attention to his 1.3 patches, and I'm not comfortable giving > > out commit access without any patches to the APR list. I do think we can > > give him commit access if he posts one or two messages to the list though. > > I'm not quite certain how you mean. Netware is miles from doing -anything- > in apr. It's not like a unix port, add a patch here or there. > > This is a wholesale port, much like the Win32 or OS2 implementations. > > Can I suggest you go back and browse some of his submissions, or simply let > those familiar with his patches push (for or against) on this? OTOH, if your > concern is granting commit access without a serious commitment on his part > to -use- the access ... then if others agree we should table and get his > commitement from him in the form of phase-1 of a Netware port.
Sorry, my message wasn't meant as a -1, it just wasn't a +1, more like a +0. I understand that Netware is a complete re-write. If Netware is miles from doing -anything-, then why will this light a fire (just curious)? Ryan _______________________________________________________________________________ Ryan Bloom [EMAIL PROTECTED] 406 29th St. San Francisco, CA 94131 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
