On 16 May 2016 at 13:43, Stefan <luke1...@posteo.de> wrote: > On 5/16/2016 11:42, Ivan Zhakov wrote: >> On 15 May 2016 at 03:02, Stefan <luke1...@gmx.de> wrote: >>> On 5/15/2016 01:13, Stefan wrote: >>>> [[[ >>>> Add a troubleshooting section to 1.9 to help users tracing down problems >>>> related to proxies when locking/unlocking multiple files. >>>> >>>> * docs/release-notes/1.9.html >>>> (troubleshooting): Add new section including http-pipelining issue >>>> description. >>>> ]]] >>> >>> Small correction to patchnotes: >>> >>> [[[ >>> Add a troubleshooting section to 1.9 to help users tracing down problems >>> related to proxies when locking/unlocking multiple files. >>> >>> * docs/release-notes/1.9.html >>> (troubleshooting): Add new section including http-pipelining issue >>> description. >>> (news): Add link to new troubleshooting section. >>> ]]] >>> >> I think it's better to use term "HTTP pipelining" instead of >> "http-pipelining" on the website. Another wording suggestion: replace >> ".. protocols/applications involved in processing http-pipelining." >> with something like ".. protocols/applications involved in processing >> pipelined HTTP requests." > > Thanks for the review Ivan, attached patch incorporates your changes and > also changes the section name (http-pipeline-issue -> > http-pipelining-issue). > Thanks for fixing that, but title still uses term 'http-pipelining": +<h3>Lock/Unlock errors related to http-pipelining + <a class="sectionlink" href="#http-pipelining-issue" + title="Link to this section">¶</a> +</h3>
-- Ivan Zhakov
