> The thing is that this seems like an obvious improvement Such a view can be promising. > (albeit not a terribly critical one). The prioritisation influences change integration considerably. > It reduces SLoC and removes an unnecessary check. I hope that such goals will be reconsidered also for this software module. > AFAICS the patch you mention wasn't rejected on technical grounds, > but simply wasn't picked up. The usual factors were involved for free software development. > If there is a reason why this change isn't warranted > then I'd like to know why so I can send better patches in future :-) I hope that also your change interests can increase chances for software evolution in desired directions. With which delays will specific improvements be achieved? Regards, Markus
