0.93 and 1.0 [was: segfault on rfc2047-like subject]

[David Relson]

On Sat, 09 Oct 2004 02:00:48 +0200
Matthias Andree wrote:

...[snip]...


> Observing the whole issue a bit broader, word.[ch] pretty much
> resembles the C++ standard library's "string" class. Using that would
> save us a lot of hassle, but I'd suggest that C++ is a post-1.0 issue.

Speaking of 1.0, what are your thoughts on my proposal to promote the
TXN code to HEAD and release 0.93?