[rt-devel] (no subject)

[james.c.terry at yale.edu]

Vivek Khera writes:

>>>>> "JT" == James Terry <james.c.terry at yale.edu> writes:

JT> Great, but since this is a known issue and there seems to be a known
fix,
JT> can't the fix be implemented in the next version?

>Um... apparently it *is* fixed in the updated version of mod_perl.
>How do you expect an application to work around such a bug?


See my original post.

Is it reasonable to ask for a <20 char bugfix that will prevent users
from complaining?  I don't mean to harp on this point, but the cost of
implementing my fix is negligible, and the benefits are real.  Coping
with even a buggy version of mod_perl seems to be worthwhile for O(0)
costs such as these.  

--Jim