> (... and I see it was merged already. Cool.) I had reviewed (and have also been using) the patches 1[1] and 3[2] in the series since the first time they were sent. Had the same trivial comment about the second one but I let it slip - it's a good fix and I'm eager to get this kind of stuff in and backlog cleared out.
> Looks good to me, though I'm still a little green on Python 2/3 > compatibility. I've been runnning this (plus other patches) since you What are your thoughts on the use of 'six' for this stuff? Would it help you here? Stephen [1] https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/468579/ [2] https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/468568/ _______________________________________________ Patchwork mailing list Patchwork@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/patchwork
