On 09/10/2007 05:39 PM, Martin Kraemer wrote: > On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 05:02:52PM +0200, Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group wrote: >> 1. IMHO requires a minor bump. >> 2. Why messing around with lb_score any longer? Instead of > ... > > Sorry for stepping in on the discussion -- but Jim has tried to clean > the code, JFC has helped providing alternative patches, and all they > got was vetoes. > > Isn't it time that, instead of a veto, a patch was posted?
Sorry for being confused, but what veto are you talking about? All I have seen have been proposals, commits, comments on those and a discussion that seems to be very long and extensive for the issue we are talking about. > > I may sound harsh, but it's sad to see so much time wasted by > formalities... No it does not sound harsh to me, but I agree that we are wasting too much time with this. Regards Rüdiger
