From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <zsh-workers-return-14339-mason-zsh=primenet.com.au@sunsite.dk>
Received: (qmail 5805 invoked from network); 15 May 2001 00:58:23 -0000
Received: from sunsite.dk (130.225.51.30)
  by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 15 May 2001 00:58:23 -0000
Received: (qmail 2796 invoked by alias); 15 May 2001 00:58:17 -0000
Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.dk; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
X-No-Archive: yes
X-Seq: 14339
Received: (qmail 2781 invoked from network); 15 May 2001 00:58:16 -0000
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 17:57:47 -0700 (PDT)
From: Wayne Davison <wayned@users.sourceforge.net>
X-X-Sender:  <wayne@phong.blorf.net>
To: Bart Schaefer <schaefer@candle.brasslantern.com>
Cc: Zsh Workers <zsh-workers@sunsite.dk>
Subject: Re: Latest hist-immediate-drop patch
In-Reply-To: <010514155811.ZM10321@candle.brasslantern.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.33L2.0105141756570.17647-100000@phong.blorf.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

I've been rather ambivilent about the new option, but I think I'm ready
to side with you on the issue -- this delayed-drop is the way the
history code should have worked in the first place.  Both Zefram and
Sven voted for the inclusion of the option, though, which is the "safe"
choice (and everyone else has abstained).  I'd be quite happy to remove
the hist_immediate_drop option from my patch if we can reach some sort
of an agreement here.  Any changed votes?  Any new votes?  Or shall I
just take the bull by the horns and decide for us all?

..wayne..