On Fri, 12 Dec 2003, Peter Reilly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This change breaks our old friend <macrodef/> which uses > DynamicConfigurator to implement elements and attributes of the > macros.
Does than mean that we'll need a DynamicConfiguratorNS in 1.6 to make macrodef work? In order to avoid breaking backwards compatibility in DynamicConfigurator too badly, that is. Stefan --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
