* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 09:09:59PM CET:
> On Monday 29 November 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> > I approve the patch but ask you to keep that coverage in, now you update
> > the patch with an unrelated new change whose applicability depends on
> > completely different fact
On Monday 29 November 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> Hello Stefano,
>
Hi Ralf. Most of your objections are correct, and I'll apply the
patch with just the original nits addressed. Still, I disagree with
you on a minor point; see below if you are interested.
> * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Mon, No
Hello Stefano,
* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 01:55:27PM CET:
> On Monday 29 November 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> > * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 02:37:28PM CET:
> > > The attached patch is based off of maint, and intended for master.
> > > OK to apply?
>
On Monday 29 November 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 02:37:28PM CET:
> > The attached patch is based off of maint, and intended for master.
> > OK to apply?
>
> With nits addressed.
>
> Thanks,
> Ralf
>
> > Improve and extend tests on `:=' variab
On Monday 29 November 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 11:00:41PM CET:
> > I pushed the attached patch to maint, and merged into master and
> > branch-1.11.
>
> Thank you, that looks good. I haven't had a chance to test this,
> though, with Savannah
