On Thu Jun 07 05:21:33 2007, jkeen <!-- x --> at verizon.net wrote: > Paul Cochrane wrote: > >> 'rpath' sounds pretty general to me (if not particularly > >> self-documenting). Is there really a significant bang for the buck to > >> changing it? (Or, different way of asking same question: If that > >> comment weren't there, would we care?) > > > > Put simply: I don't think so. I'm in the process of (slowly, and > > eventually) converting all the todo items in the perl source across to > > RT tickets. This has the dual purpose of us checking corners of the > > code which might be a bit dusty and cleaning the code up a bit. If we > > don't need the comment, we can just delete it and resolve the ticket. > > > Perhaps you could run 'svn blame' on that comment, determine who wrote > it and contact her/him to see if anything has come of it. >
To update the ticket: kid51 asked leo if the comment were necessary anymore and leo replied saying that yes, it was unnecessary. The comment and TODO item has been removed as of r18874, and this ticket is now marked as resolved. Paul
