On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 12:43:50 +0100
Michiel Meeuwissen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


>  [_] +1 (YES)
>  [_] +0 (ABSTAIN )
>  [X] -1 (NO), because :
>  [_] VETO, because:

I do support the idea of extensible functions, however the biggest
problem I see is the lack of detail about the function of current
functions (part of it has already been broken inadvertly). 
Also the actual mechanism is not entirely clear, for instance is it
global, or just working on the bridge ?
I also think it is too close to the code freeze , but that is personal.

-- 
Rico Jansen ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
"You call it untidy, I call it LRU ordered" -- Daniel Barlow

Reply via email to