>> stas, perrin had also mentioned the idea that since we were moving from
>> Apache::OK to Apache2::OK (again with a virtual namespace) it might make
>> more sense to use Apache::Const::OK instead.  I guess that's lots of
>> typing,
>> but uses always have OK if they want.
>>
>> thoughts?
> 
> 
> Sure, go for it.

and the same for APR::Const?  APR::EBUSY would become APR::Const::EBUSY?

--Geoff

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to