-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Malte S. Stretz writes: > On Sunday 26 September 2004 10:42 CET Daniel Quinlan wrote: > >[...] > > Do we really need to do this now? This is not going to significantly > > help performance, accuracy, or memory usage, is it? > > As much as I loved to have this thing renamed, why didn't we do this > *before* we released 3.0? Or to quote you from bug 3668: "there's *no way* > I'd be happy making any of these changes before 4.0.0 ;)" (Actually, the > "no way" is exaggerated but I don't like the idea at this point). Well, that's a different kettle of fish -- bug 3668 is changing configuration file paths, this is changing a class name, and ensuring that backwards compatibility is preserved for that change. - --j. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Exmh CVS iD8DBQFBWK8YQTcbUG5Y7woRApXZAJ44uU8QE6pAgG9p6I5BYcsUgnheJACfcrW+ nUz/HYPlrE1qJj3B32nQq7g= =mbcS -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
