Jeremias Maerki wrote:
Hi Peter

On 20.12.2002 00:30:13 Peter B. West wrote:

Jeremias Maerki wrote:

:-) Ok, you're sentenced to implement the same functionality in the
trunk. I'm -0 for the inclusion in the branch as it sends the wrong
message IMO. But I'm looking forward to seeing bidi support in action in
the trunk.
Jeremias,

I would encourage Oleg to bring this functionality into HEAD.

Didn't I? :-)

Yes; right above. Call my comment an extended +0 for the sentence you imposed.


If it already exists in Oleg's working copy of the maint branch (for reasons which have frequently been canvassed here), I think it would be churlish of us to deny access to our faithful band of users.

I would agree was it not for something that is an argument for the
redesign. And read again, please. I wrote -0, not -1. I don't deny
anything to anybody, just expressing an opinion.

Same here - just an opinion.  That's why I went for a +0.


So, fop-0_20_2-maintain +0.
Peter
--
Peter B. West  [EMAIL PROTECTED]  http://www.powerup.com.au/~pbwest/
"Lord, to whom shall we go?"


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

Reply via email to