On Mon, Jun 26, 2023 at 2:34 PM Thomas Passin <tbp100...@gmail.com> wrote:
If we had a proposed set of requirements for a change to fix a well-defined > problem, we probably wouldn't be in the fix we're in right now about this > PR. > We aren't in a fix. We just need to find the least disruptive way of transitioning to the new unls The PR has had a life of its own, driven by exploration, not requirements. The exploration involved simplifying the code and finding the limits of compatibility. The result has been worth two weeks of my life. The PR won't be merged until neither you nor everyone else has any further significant objections. Edward -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "leo-editor" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to leo-editor+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/leo-editor/CAMF8tS2Je9at93AJt%3DMn2SHEr%2Bw0TaOh1FH3ypqK0-P2n_iPHw%40mail.gmail.com.
