Fwd: I'm sorry

Neven Has haski at sezampro.yu
Sun Feb 11 07:31:02 PST 2001


On Sat, Feb 10, 2001 at 05:14:28PM -0500, Gerard Beekmans wrote:

Not really, but anyway ...

> I'm very sorry for the confusion I produced. I did this ALFS.pm stuff
> and made some mistakes:

<snip>

It's really not that bad. I'm sorry if my previous message(s) sounded a bit 
"hard", it's just that when I first started the new code I got a lot of 
errors, so I wasn't too happy about it. :)

> The strongest drawback of ALFS.pm is, that it seems to require
> perl 5.6. Another one is that it uses eval() heavily. I will
> do another rewrite, I think. In the meantime I suggest we switch
> back to alfs until ALFS.pm is more stable . What do you think?

It would be nice if we could make it work with some older perl versions, 
at least 5.00503, since there are a lot of people still using it.

I don't know if it's necessary to do another rewrite though ? I'm sure we 
could think of something. :) But if you decide to do it anyway, go ahead. 
Just let us know, because I would like to start hacking the code again, so it 
would be nice to know. :)

And let's not switch back to alfs (what ever that means ;). 
The more we test the current code, the better.

>   /me slaps himself with the how-to-develop-software-
>   with-other-ppl-book(tm)

Hope it's not a heavy one.

> But I tested ALFS.pm and used the latest code from cvs.

Great.

Looking forward working with you,

Neven







More information about the alfs-discuss mailing list