Thanks, Dan. Well, I'm not familiar w/ the code in question, so I'm just a cheerleader here, but I think your suggestions sound sane. Certainly, avoiding a double-re-ingest is justification for futzing with the 2.3-2.4.0 script.
Thanks, Dan. Well, I'm not familiar w/ the code in question, so I'm just a cheerleader here, but I think your suggestions sound sane. Certainly, avoiding a double-re-ingest is justification for futzing with the 2.3-2.4.0 script.