On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 8:32 PM, Gregg Lind <[email protected]> wrote: > It does solve both of those issues, *technically*. I don't really > understand your hostility to tagging, though. Would it negatively > impact you in any way? Is the cost of making tags so high? Having > simple, sequential integer tags is nice for pypi, RPM and lots of > other systems. > > In another thread today, the 0.34 was announced! Clearly there > someone else saw some utility in doing so.
1. I'm not being hostile towards tagging. 2. Also, I speak for myself, not the developer(s). What I don't understand is why do you _insist_ on tagging when we have covered more than one solution that will do exactly what you've asked for without making any changes in the way web.py is being developed. Of course, if Anand agrees that there is a realistic need for more frequent tagging, good for you. Frankly, I couldn't care less, because I maintain my own fork at my own leisure. :) But until then, you do have quite a few ways to solve the problem using the "least you can do<TM>" principle. -- Branko Vukelić http://foxbunny.tumblr.com/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/16889...@n04/ http://www.twitter.com/foxbunny http://github.com/foxbunny -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "web.py" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/webpy?hl=en.
