---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/100443/#review3326
---
I would like to have a decision on this.
Is it still valid...
-
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/100647/#review3325
---
Ship it!
Couldn't see any obvious problems with the patch and I
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/101015/#review3318
---
When the track is stopped you should get the trackChanged signal
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/101170/#review3316
---
Ship it!
Looks fine
- Ralf
On April 21, 2011, 4:35 p.m., Mic
> On May 14, 2011, 11:38 a.m., Ralf Engels wrote:
> > The patch looks sensible and harmless.
> > Ship It
Upps, forgot. Is there a bug entry for that?
- Ralf
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://git.revi
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/101329/#review3314
---
Ship it!
The patch looks sensible and harmless.
Ship It
- Ralf
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/101347/#review3313
---
Ship it!
I would like not to use seperate backends for the cach