> That said, if there are still users who care, let me explain why these > suggestions, most of which were made before, weren't accepted.
_I_ reverted the code, and _I_ have explained in my first email why _I_ chose to revert the code. The problem is not at all, in _my_ point of view, anything related to whether not my approach will work. On the contrary, I have told you that true reversibility can be achieved without any security problem. The reversion was _all_ about the fundamental design. This thread should long been dead but I will not allow you to end it with misleading conclusions such as my approach has fundamental flaws. I can resume my work on embedding, just to protect my dignity, if you guys agree that "we accept your design as long as this problem can be fixed". If you cannot, just shut up. Bo
