Toby Cubitt writes:
> On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 10:52:09PM +0100, Nicolas Goaziou wrote:
>> Toby Cubitt writes:
>>
>> > Here it is again (attached).
>>
>> Thank you. However, could you provide an appropriate commit message
>> (functions modified, reason...)?
>>
>> Sorry for not catching that ea
Toby Cubitt writes:
> Sorry, not sure why I forgot to do that. Here's an updated version with
> suitable commit message.
Applied. Thank you.
Regards,
On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 10:52:09PM +0100, Nicolas Goaziou wrote:
> Toby Cubitt writes:
>
> > Here it is again (attached).
>
> Thank you. However, could you provide an appropriate commit message
> (functions modified, reason...)?
>
> Sorry for not catching that earlier.
Sorry, not sure why I fo
Toby Cubitt writes:
> Here it is again (attached).
Thank you. However, could you provide an appropriate commit message
(functions modified, reason...)?
Sorry for not catching that earlier.
Regards,
On Sat, Dec 13, 2014 at 03:23:34PM +0100, Nicolas Goaziou wrote:
> > It's a fairly straightforward one, which simply adds a useful new
> > archiving function without touching much else.
> >
> > Archiving by date seems such an obvious omission from the existing
> > archiving commands, I wouldn't hav
Hello,
Toby Cubitt writes:
> Did this patch get lost in the noise?
Probably.
> It's a fairly straightforward one, which simply adds a useful new
> archiving function without touching much else.
>
> Archiving by date seems such an obvious omission from the existing
> archiving commands, I would
Did this patch get lost in the noise?
It's a fairly straightforward one, which simply adds a useful new
archiving function without touching much else.
Archiving by date seems such an obvious omission from the existing
archiving commands, I wouldn't have thought this patch was too
controversial. (
