[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: revivesa status 2008/07/09
In article <20080725.144608.133024208.he%uninett.no@localhost> Havard wrote:
: > Bringing SA back invents more than 3000 lines of very
: > complicated code. Why?
: > - To support specific backwards compatibility which we never actually
: > supported (see what Andrew and Jason wrote).
: It's my opinion that such a statement is attempting to rewrite
: If my memory isn't failing me, it was only after the introduction
: of 1:1 threading that it was deemed required to modify the
: backward compatibility rule. This is a considerable change from
: the way we have operated in the past, and, unsurprisingly by now,
: one that I'm not entirely happy with. Therefore, for that reason
: alone, I support getting the revivesa into the tree.
What Havard said.
Main Index |
Thread Index |