On Sat, 2003-08-30 at 02:20, seth vidal wrote: > So if it seems like I've not acted on your patches it's not b/c I'm > ignoring them it's b/c I'm trying to make sure they work and make sense > based around the other changes that will happen in 2.1 No prob at all. I needed some of this stuff ASAP for boxes at work and figured there was no harm in submitting it. I really wasn't expecting it to go into the 2.0.x series as it seems modifications are being kept to stability/efficiency type stuff. Let me know if there's anything that doesn't make sense in there or if there's anything else you need a body for. I'd love to contribute in any way I can. - Ryan
