12 Feb
2003
12 Feb
'03
9:23 a.m.
On Tuesday 11 February 2003 5:21 pm, Jeremy Hylton wrote:
On Tue, 2003-02-11 at 12:10, Shane Hathaway wrote:
I'd like to do the transaction states, because it would keep the code in zodb3 and zodb4 similar.
There are application-level reasons to mark a transaction as doomed, and I would like to keep *that* code looking similar ;-). The transaction states approach would work in that context too, right? -- Toby Dickenson http://www.geminidataloggers.com/people/tdickenson