> It seems to have this same issue. Any idea if your idea above made it into any plans for a future release?
My apologies, Gary. I've not invested the time into this. It's not a trivial change, but it is a necessary one. I've elevated the priority on the logged issue so hopefully it will be more visible to me, now.
> I was told it was a bug
I would call it a "chore" in desperate need of attention! The code does function as intended, it just performs poorly with large packages and needs optimization.
Michael