> Mike rewrote the complete netwrok package that you are using and he did 
> a lot for the community even if this was not public.

Definetely I was not to degrade his efforts. But can we now settle on 
that he is qualified responsible for socket operations? If so, then I 
have these questions and I'll be glad if he answers in separate thread:

- why TelnetProtocolClient is named so when it doesn't implement RFC854?
- why HTTPClient doesn't follow ProtocolClient model?
- why HTTPClient's examples are not updated to work?
- why OldSocket and OldSimpleClientSocket were left over?
- why no unit tests were written with Socket?

> What have you been doing for the community? You are free not to reply
 > but think about it.

I admit, not much. I was developing some apps with seaside, but these 
projects failed. Then I refactored sockets so that OldSocket is gone. It 
was quite unthankful as I met with these people's attitudes:

- why need to touch it, it was working, right?
- oh no, don't dump archaic stuff, there are examples in it.
- let it be, everything's okay, just ask mama to buy more memory.

I wish I could be more helpful but I'm starting to be sick of it all.

-- 
Kamil