On Mon, 2010-12-06, Blair Zajac wrote: > On 12/6/10 7:47 AM, Julian Foad wrote: > > On Sun, 2010-12-05, Stefan Fuhrmann wrote: > >> I've felt kind of uneasy about that issue as well. > >> However, it would have been difficult to implement > >> a deprecated svn_checksum_to_cstring() in terms > >> of svn_checksum_to_cstring2(). > > > > I don't think Blair was concerned about how the function is implemented, > > but about the API promises. (He can correct me if I'm wrong.) > > Nope, that's correct. > > > But, as I said in my previous reply in this thread, I think it's fine to > > just change the existing API as you have done. > > Well, I don't agree, for problems that it could cause later, but don't feel > that > strongly to argue about it :)
Ok. FWIW, I'd also be very happy with a revved API, I just don't feel strongly enough to do it myself. - Julian
