> you know damn well thats not what i meant! jackass. the current  "global id"
> idea is simply not enough to fix much of anything.

:)

I was merely seeing it as a starting point for thinking about a
solution. I think it would be possible, though like I said, it would
very easily become over-engineered.

So - considering you don't think a global id is any use to start with
- that leaves us with having a shared jar then, right? Or do you have
other ideas?

Eelco

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

Reply via email to