* [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: [PATCH v3 0/4] Initial fetch() refactoring
@ 2014-01-27 4:00 99% ` W. Trevor King
0 siblings, 0 replies; 1+ results
From: W. Trevor King @ 2014-01-27 4:00 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-portage-dev; +Cc: Rafael Goncalves Martins
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 757 bytes --]
I've queued the following changes since v3:
* Fix “we're relying” → “we're not relying” in the “Factor out
_get_uris” patch [1].
* Use an “ebuild: fetch:” prefix for all patches [2].
in my fetch-refactor branch, but it's been fairly quiet since I pushed
v3 last Monday. Should I push v4 with just these commit message
changes, or should I let this cook a bit longer in case there are
further issues with v3?
Cheers,
Trevor
[1]: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.portage.devel/4079
[2]: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.portage.devel/4102
--
This email may be signed or encrypted with GnuPG (http://www.gnupg.org).
For more information, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretty_Good_Privacy
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [relevance 99%]
Results 1-1 of 1 | reverse | options above
-- pct% links below jump to the message on this page, permalinks otherwise --
2014-01-19 22:14 [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH v2 0/3] Initial fetch() refactoring W. Trevor King
2014-01-20 3:26 ` [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH v3 0/4] " W. Trevor King
2014-01-27 4:00 99% ` [gentoo-portage-dev] " W. Trevor King
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox