On 1 Mar 2012, at 18:11, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: > Let's simply reset this whole mess.
+1 to that! I think maybe we have some confusion here because attitudes have evolved over the years, and modules that would once not have been accepted to trunk are now welcomed there. Maybe there would be mileage in revisiting other non-trunk modules? > A proposal to adopt mod_firehose is attached. > > [ ] Option 1: adopt as trunk module > [ ] Option 2: adopt only as subproject > [ ] Option 3: do not adopt Conditional +1 to Option 1. mod_firehose meets a need. But my +1 has to be conditional on satisfactory integration of the complementary "firehose" utility alongside it, presumably in /bin/ . -- Nick Kew
