On Saturday 13 February 2010 00:39:02 Matthew Toseland wrote: > On Friday 12 February 2010 13:46:42 Evan Daniel wrote: > > Ideally, that's true. In practice, the blame gets assigned to the > > people who made the change that broke it, not the people who ignored > > the spec or failed to update their software. At least, that's my > > experience... > > Agreed. IMHO it would be inappropriate to make it easy for third party > plugin authors to create bogus metadata. If you *really* want to be able > to create stuff with arbitrary metadata you can use binary blobs.
NAK. What can be done (by patching fred), will be done - there is really no point in restricting raw access to java hackers. My request is just to expose a raw key interface at the FCPv2-level. Sane users will still use fproxy or the standard FCP functions. good byte
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Devl mailing list [email protected] http://osprey.vm.bytemark.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
