11 Oct
2004
11 Oct
'04
12:37 p.m.
On Mon, 2004-10-11 at 11:27 +0200, Andreas Aardal Hanssen wrote:
Why is this an option? Is there a reason why someone would want to disable this workaround?
Like Timo said:
but I thought I'd require all workarounds to be explicitly enabled so future client implementors can make sure their clients work without any of them.
johannes