On Fri, 25 Nov 2005, Andi Gutmans wrote:
> I must say that I feel deceived by this.
> Derick and I agreed that this won't be enabled for 5.1, and he then took
> advantage of the fact that release managers changed to enable his class.
> Doesn't leave a good taste in my mouth and it shouldn't happen
Hello Andi,
Friday, November 25, 2005, 6:43:25 PM, you wrote:
> BTW, just to clarify, I am not against a Date class (whatever its
> name) in the long run but I think it'd probably be a combination of
> work Derick, Pierre and new contributions.
Yes from my point of view there could coexist a b
BTW, just to clarify, I am not against a Date class (whatever its
name) in the long run but I think it'd probably be a combination of
work Derick, Pierre and new contributions.
Andi
At 09:17 AM 11/25/2005, Andi Gutmans wrote:
I must say that I feel deceived by this.
Derick and I agreed that t
I must say that I feel deceived by this.
Derick and I agreed that this won't be enabled for 5.1, and he then
took advantage of the fact that release managers changed to enable
his class. Doesn't leave a good taste in my mouth and it shouldn't
happen again in future.
Andi
At 08:31 AM 11/25/20
