Pierre van Rooden wrote:
Yes, but who currently uses VWMs besides the VPRO (who uses the new
storage classes)?
That is *not* the point, the point is that there seems to be habit to
remove functionality. And after it is pointed out that it is handy
functionality it is built back. I object to that.
Not building the functionality back in the old storage classes is not a
problem. But please be careful removing functionality as *you* might not
be using it but others might.
--
Rico Jansen ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
"You call it untidy, I call it LRU ordered" -- Daniel Barlow
