I wont refuse it if we do it this way, but it seems to me like
complicating things by adding you guys into the loop too early... Brent
or someone will post a patch, one of you guys can review it as usual,
and we'll get it into the image. After it's in, you can update the KCP
stuff.

Don't see any reason to break with procedure. Am I missing something?
(I'm not particularly interested in starting to shove any and all
changes into the KCP stream I specifically committed to check - the
point was to focus my effort).

Daniel

Stephane Ducasse <ducasse at iam.unibe.ch> wrote:
> Daniel
> 
> as suggested by andreas we will use it for the KCP. So once this is 
> stable I could simply add it into the KCP stream and create a new 
> changeset that update all the KCP deprecated to use it.
> 
> 
> Stef
> 
> 
> On Friday, May 9, 2003, at 05:01 PM, Daniel Vainsencher wrote:
> 
> > When the definitive patch is ready, we'll harvest it and make it 
> > policy.
> > We'll also need a clear explanation of the usage pattern (with 
> > example?)
> > to put up on the swiki somewhere.
> >
> > Maybe someone from the Documentation team can help with hooking it up 
> > in
> > all the right places...
> >
> > Daniel
> >
> > Brent Pinkney <pinkney_b at aircom.co.za> wrote:
> >> Ok, how do we get this idea/policy into 3.6alpha so that everyone 
> >> (not just KCP) can use it.
> >