At 10:36 AM +0200 on 4/24/97, Eric Thomas wrote:
> because the grooming code which trims pending transactions that appear to
> have become orphaned (the process responsible for approving them does not
> seem to have taken any action) had a bug and did not make a necessary
> change in a co-dependent pending transaction, which did get approved
> eventually and led to incorrect behaviour. Again there are cases where
I won't speak for other list managers out there, but Eric just summarised
*my* childhood with remarkable clarity...
-j, apologising in advance, only after the fact.
"This analogy is like lifting yourself by your own bootstraps."
-Douglas R. Hofstadter
Jamie Lawrence jal @