On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 09:47:00AM -0500, James Antill wrote:
> On Fri, 2014-01-31 at 10:33 +, Dan Kenigsberg wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 01:34:54AM -0500, James Antill wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2014-01-30 at 09:10 +, Dan Kenigsberg wrote:
> > > > Currently, in a certain flow of
> > > > d
On Fri, 2014-01-31 at 10:33 +, Dan Kenigsberg wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 01:34:54AM -0500, James Antill wrote:
> > On Thu, 2014-01-30 at 09:10 +, Dan Kenigsberg wrote:
> > > Currently, in a certain flow of
> > > depsolve.Depsolve._requiringFromTransaction(), the code joins (name,
> >
On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 01:34:54AM -0500, James Antill wrote:
> On Thu, 2014-01-30 at 09:10 +, Dan Kenigsberg wrote:
> > Currently, in a certain flow of
> > depsolve.Depsolve._requiringFromTransaction(), the code joins (name,
> > needflags, needversion) into an undelimited string, only to try t
On Thu, 2014-01-30 at 09:10 +, Dan Kenigsberg wrote:
> Currently, in a certain flow of
> depsolve.Depsolve._requiringFromTransaction(), the code joins (name,
> needflags, needversion) into an undelimited string, only to try to split
> it back within misc.string_to_prco_tuple().
>
> I would not
Currently, in a certain flow of
depsolve.Depsolve._requiringFromTransaction(), the code joins (name,
needflags, needversion) into an undelimited string, only to try to split
it back within misc.string_to_prco_tuple().
I would not claim that I understand the whole sequence, but please
consider taki
