Re: casefile.c revision

[Ben Pfaff]

John Darrington <address@hidden> writes:

> Well let's do it then.  But don't let us hold up the release of 0.4.0
> for this.

John, did the revised casefile comment that I posted earlier do a
good job of explaining the casefile changes we agreed on?  Except
that I just now realized that we decided to do casereader cloning
instead of casemarks...  Anyway, did it seem accurate other than
that?
-- 
"Welcome to the Slippery Slope. Here is your handbasket.
 Say, can you work 70 hours this week?"
--Ron Mansolino