:
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Phil Steitz [mailto:phil.ste...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Monday, October 25, 2010 08:50
>> To: Commons Developers List
>> Subject: Re: [pool] Reusing Config part 2
>>
>> On 10/25/10 11:26 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Phil Steitz [mailto:phil.ste...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, October 25, 2010 08:50
> To: Commons Developers List
> Subject: Re: [pool] Reusing Config part 2
>
> On 10/25/10 11:26 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
> > Thank you for working thr
> -Original Message-
> From: Steven Siebert [mailto:smsi...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, October 25, 2010 08:43
> To: Commons Developers List
> Subject: Re: [pool] Reusing Config part 2
>
> Gary,
>
> I tossed this around as well, and noted these fields as a &
On 10/25/10 11:26 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
Thank you for working through this Simone.
I would like to discuss something I took for granted in my experimental patch
for [POOL-173]. I can see that you took and a more conservative (and safer ;)
approach in your version. I am glad to see this becau
Gary,
I tossed this around as well, and noted these fields as a "possible promote"
to the Abstract configuration, because I agree that there probably isn't a
"good" reason why one pool has those features and the other doesn't. (if
this is indeed the case, these would probably best be tracked in
Thank you for working through this Simone.
I would like to discuss something I took for granted in my experimental patch
for [POOL-173]. I can see that you took and a more conservative (and safer ;)
approach in your version. I am glad to see this because we can now more easily
discuss it becau
