On Sun, Apr 8, 2012 at 07:14, Jaromil <jaromil@???> wrote:
> On Sat, 07 Apr 2012, Dan Dennedy wrote:
>
>> There is nothing wrong with string params. There is not much we can
>> do about old, unmaintained hosts that tried to support them before
>> there was actually any in existence and now do not agree to the
>> current spec. If you recall, the addition of the first string param
>> revealed problems in the original spec and had to impose some rules
>> about memory management.

Are you saying the current spec now has string params ? If so that is
news to me, and can I ask (again) that in future such things are
discussed and agreed on the mailing list (or at least notified) before
adding to the spec.

As I pointed out before, not everybody has time to read every
iteration of the header file to keep up with any changes.

Salsaman.



>
> ACK. thanks, it was actually a matter of recalling that.
>
>> I am a member of this new list.
>
> everyone on the old list is here and is reading this.
>
> is just a matter of choosing the destination address or update to
> frei0r@??? in the addressbook. whatever people chooses, I'm
> forced to communicate through this channel, just tried replying on the
> old one, but mails aren't passing through.
>
> ciao
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Frei0r mailing list - http://frei0r.dyne.org
> Free video plugins, minimal and cross-platform.
> http://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/frei0r