On 2015/09/12 21:25, Landry Breuil wrote: > On Sat, Sep 12, 2015 at 02:51:53PM +0200, Daniel Jakots wrote: > > On Sat, 12 Sep 2015 13:34:17 +0100, Stuart Henderson > > <st...@openbsd.org> wrote: > > > > > On 2015/09/12 10:00, Daniel Jakots wrote: > > > > A few days after this email, I made a new claws-mail package on my > > > > laptop without the patches that were containing the link of the bug > > > > id 2640 or 2642 (hard way ...). I don't really understand what the > > > > patches should do but I haven't encountered any problem. > > > > > > So how about this with those extra patches (i.e. the ones that > > > upstream rejected) removed? > > > > I guess it's fine. Thanks! > > Just for the record, all those patches were added 3 years ago, see > http://marc.info/?t=134083762400001&r=1&w=2 for history.
yes, I saw that, but since upstream found problems with the patches, the sensible thing is to remove them and if somebody wants them brought back, they can address the problems that were found :)
