On Wed, Jul 27, 2005 at 11:39:36PM +0200, Graham Leggett wrote: > Joe Orton wrote: > >Any objections to this? > > None at all - if the v2.0 code can be made more stable this is always a > good thing, but there are lots more problems in the v2.0 code that are > fixed in the v2.2 rewrite.
Ah, sorry, I'd presumed this would affect 2.2 as well since the timeout handling there looked much the same, but it seems not (though I don't claim to understand why :). I'll just add this to STATUS for 2.0.x in that case. joe
