On 05/02/2012 12:33 AM, Eric Blake wrote: > On 05/01/2012 04:27 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote: >> HI Eric, thanks for the super-quick review. >> >> On 05/02/2012 12:18 AM, Eric Blake wrote: >>> On 05/01/2012 04:14 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote: >>>> Starting from commit v1.11-662-g52246cc of XXX, "XXX", aclocal has >>> >>> Did you mean to fix the XXX? >>> >> Oops, I used a stale "git.msg" file when committing. Fixed like this: >> >> Starting from commit v1.11-662-g52246cc of 18-02-2012, "cmdline parsing: > > Better, but still not ideal. > >>>> +* Bugs introduced by 1.11.3: >>>> + >>>> + - When given non-option arguments, aclocal rejects them, instead of >>>> + silently ignoring them. >>> >>> perhaps to 1.11.3? >>> >> I can't parse this, sorry. Could you rephrase? > > I should have used '...', as it was a continuation of my earlier > question. I was asking whether you meant s/XXX/1.11.3/, but it turns > out you meant s/XXX/2012-02-18/. And remember, yyyy-mm-dd is less > ambiguous than dd-mm-yyyy or mm-dd-yyyy, not to mention it is the ISO > standard. > Right, and it's not the first time you tell me that :-(
Anyway, I've amended the commit message to use the ISO form for the date before pushing. Thanks, Stefano
