Reinier Lamers <[email protected]> added the comment: Op vrijdag 13 augustus 2010 19:56 schreef Eric Kow: > Petr thinks that issue1290 does not belong in the Darcs 2.5 > release because it's so late in the release cycle. While I > find it a bit regrettable, I'm inclined to agree to him :-/ > > What do you think?
The reason I kept this in the 2.5 milestone was the issue title which contains the word "broken", implying a regression of some kind to me. Reading the replies to the issue, this seems not to be the case. Still I see no reason why this couldn't go into 2.5. The fix seems simple enough. Are there risks in including this that I'm forgetting to consider? Reinier __________________________________ Darcs bug tracker <[email protected]> <http://bugs.darcs.net/patch347> __________________________________ _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
