On 03/04/2016 02:06 PM, John Garbutt wrote:
> tl;dr
> As on IRC, I don't think this should get an FFE this cycle.
>
> On 4 March 2016 at 10:56, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> The actual BP that links to the approved spec is here: [1] and 2
>> outstanding patches are [2][3].
>>
>> Apart from t
tl;dr
As on IRC, I don't think this should get an FFE this cycle.
On 4 March 2016 at 10:56, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The actual BP that links to the approved spec is here: [1] and 2
> outstanding patches are [2][3].
>
> Apart from the usual empathy-inspired reasons to allow this (code's be
I'll make sure to deliver the patches if FFE is granted.
Regards,
-Yingxin
On Friday, March 4, 2016 6:56 PM Nikola Đipanov wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> The actual BP that links to the approved spec is here: [1] and 2 outstanding
> patches are [2][3].
>
> Apart from the usual empathy-inspired reasons to
Hi,
The actual BP that links to the approved spec is here: [1] and 2
outstanding patches are [2][3].
Apart from the usual empathy-inspired reasons to allow this (code's been
up for a while, yet only had real review on the last day etc.) which are
not related to the technical merit of the work, th