On 11/14/2005 10:07 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > Jim Jagielski wrote: > >>Yes, the _UNSET usage is very inconsistent, but it's something >>that's been inherited from older versions :)
So fixing it, breaks backward compatibility ;-) >> >>I think that either: >> >> 1. _UNSET should be removed >> or >> 2. _UNSET should be considered _OFF >> >>My pers. pref is #1... Again, it's these types of cleanups >>that should be done now ;) >> > > > Actually, I take that back... We should simply make > things more consistent and use _UNSET better. It *is* > useful info. > This is also my opinion. As soon as some from the 'older' guys who know the history of UNC better than me say either 1. Hey we need this behaviour that is currently imposed by not setting UNC. Call it XY, or 2. Ups, this is inconsistent, by default it should behave like On/Off/DNS I am willing to step in and create a patch to do just that. So far I have your opinion which I read as 2.: Default should be OFF (I personally would tend to 2.: Default ON). But as some is usually more than one :-), I would like to hear an additional (not necessarily another) opinion and then I start running. Regards Rüdiger
