Mario Ivankovits wrote: [snip] > So, my questions are: > * [X] Do you agree that such an evolution might make sense > * and if so, should I > ** [ ] add a VFS-global (static) flag to enable this > wrapper-like-mode or > ** [X] can I fork VFS to put the current head into > maintainance (or more > correct "dormant") mode and start with e.g. VFS 2.0? > > I'd prefer VFS 2.0.
- Jörg --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
