![]()
From: Martin Schulze (joey@finlandia.Infodrom.North.DE)
Date: Wed Oct 27 1999 - 16:12:06 CDT
Daniel Stenberg wrote:
> I agree. But if adding 100 things means 2 old functions accidentaly breaks,
> I'd still go for the 100 things and then spend time to fix the 2 added bugs.
Sure.
> Thanks for bringing the patch!
Thanks for maintaining and improving the source - all of you.
Regards,
Joey
-- No question is too silly to ask, but, of course, some are too silly to answer. -- Perl book Please always Cc to me when replying to me on the lists.
![]()