Neil Lunn writes:
> I would suggest that in all cases the Authors know exactly what they mean.
> If you disagree take it up with them. But I would generally say that when
> you don't maintain a piece of code it is not very good community spirit to
> go out and say "The Author is wrong and I'm right, so everybody change
their
> code". The Timeout option is there for a reason, it's an option. You don't
> tell everybody "You no longer have an option".
I am not sure where you are coming from here and, it sounds like you
yourself have no idea either! I'll be polite and just say.... I actuaully
think Michael Hoffman's patch suggestion was an excellent one for LWP in my
case. I been using LWP to prcess 1,000's of urls and the timeout issue made
it too painful to use. I commented out the Timeout and haven't yet
experienced any prolonged snags which means what generally takes hours for
LWP to handle now only takes 10 mins :-)
