Re: FYI: 'ithreads' considered useless mail

On söndag, mar 16, 2003, at 00:48 Europe/Stockholm, nadim wrote:

>
> In the same spirit as 'ithreads vs. 5.005 threads [gratuitous 
> bitching]' I
> wrote a "'ithreads' considered useless" and
> mailed it to [email protected] has it is a more active (though 
> general'
> mailling list. I and the other member of the
> list would appreciate your opinions.
>
>

I would appreciate any suggestions (not rants) how these problems with 
threads.pm could be solved.

Fact is, 5005 threads were abandoned because no one stepped forward to 
make them work, so apparently enough people didn't care for them.

Arthur