On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 15:20:46 -0500 Andrew Deason <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 22:06:32 +0200 > Stephan Wiesand <[email protected]> wrote: > > > sorry, I disagree. If you (the developers and the gatekeepers) are > > sure that DAFS is the way forward, and reasonably close to being > > ready, 1.6 and on should not support anything else. Why defer this to > > 1.10? > [...] Also, when I last brought up eliminating non-DAFS, I was told DAFS does not compile on windows. But that can be changed :) -- Andrew Deason [email protected] _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-info mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info
