Jeff Trawick wrote: >Aaron Bannert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >>I appreciate that you are trying to moderate my usage of the -1 (veto), >>but feel it is my duty to inform the list as soon as possible that I >>wouldn't be happy with this big of a change. >> > >Maybe a veto wasn't appropriate, but it seemed clear to me that a >number of people would rather have the new code side by side with the >old for a while, and Brian didn't seem disturbed about that notion at >all. Hopefully nobody will actually go remove worker as soon as >Brian's code is committed :) >
I disagree. Unless someone wants to volunteer to put a workaround in the current worker code to fix the queue-full case, I can't rationalize including it in another beta or GA release. We need to either fix it or remove it. --Brian
