On Fri, Oct 02, 2009 at 12:03:55 +0200, [email protected] wrote: > Re-sending amended patch. However, I did not wrap 'darcs changes...' > with a 'not', as explained in another message in this thread > (<[email protected]>).
Looks good to me. Applied thanks! added regression test for issue1632 ----------------------------------- Btw, I would have named that Accept issue1632: 'darcs changes d/f' should not list any changes. I don't expect everybody to keep all these conventions in mind; they're just little touches which help. -- Eric Kow <http://www.nltg.brighton.ac.uk/home/Eric.Kow> PGP Key ID: 08AC04F9
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
