Hi,
On 2023/10/19 9:06, Daniel Sahlberg wrote:
Hi,
I might have been a bit harsh here to Veto this merge, after actually
providing a positive note. But I investigated why the merge didn't go
through and I realised there is a digit missing in the nomination for the
first three revisions. I'm fairly sure it should be r1912501, r1912502,
r1912503 instead (missing the third digit).
Thank you for pointing out this. Actually this nomination was
entirely invalid -- it contains typos in revisions and as a
result of sorting, the top revision number of this nomination
was changed from one I intended.
I'd like someone (Yasuhito?) to crosscheck, if you agree feel free to
modify my vote back to the old +0 with comment and move to approved.
As it had contained wrong revision numbers, I kept your vote -1.
Thanks,
--
Yasuhito FUTATSUKI <futat...@poem.co.jp>/<futat...@yf.bsdclub.org>
