On 12/12/13 15:25, Olemis Lang wrote:
On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 8:33 AM, Gary Martin <[email protected]>wrote:
[...]
While we could resort to POSTing instead, I can see the reasoning behind
not doing that. Pragmatism would probably trump such reasoning though. I
think other solutions would either limit the field sizes or warn of
possible loss of data over some limit. Perhaps I have missed something
though.
IMO let's use POST
I think that is probably the correct answer too but I am tempted to
commit the patch as is and let Antony continue with enhancements if he
wishes. I am unaware of any regressions from his current approach so I
think this is already much better behaviour.
Cheers,
Gary
