On 24 November 2014 at 16:49, Julian Edwards <email address hidden>
wrote:
>
> @GMB, it seems as though there's some "getClientFor()" calls out there
> that are not catching exceptions. The code cannot assume it will always
> work.
Yeah, it's pretty atrocious. I'll get on this presently.
On 24 November 2014 at 16:49, Julian Edwards <email address hidden>
wrote:
>
> @GMB, it seems as though there's some "getClientFor()" calls out there
> that are not catching exceptions. The code cannot assume it will always
> work.
Yeah, it's pretty atrocious. I'll get on this presently.