Lars Schneider <larsxschnei...@gmail.com> writes: >> I've followed what was available at the public-inbox archive, but it >> is unclear what the conclusion was. >> >> For the first one your "how about" non-patch, to which Peff said >> "that's simple and good", looked good to me as well, but is it >> available as a final patch that I can just take and apply (otherwise >> I think I can do the munging myself, but I'd rather be spoon-fed >> when able ;-). > > Sure! Here you go: > http://public-inbox.org/git/20161110111348.61580-1-larsxschnei...@gmail.com/ > > >> I do not have a strong opinion on the second one. For an interim >> solution, disabling webserver tests certainly is expedite and safe, >> so I am fine taking it as-is, but I may have missed strong >> objections. > > I haven't seen strong objections either. Just for reference, here is the > patch: > http://public-inbox.org/git/20161017002550.88782-3-larsxschnei...@gmail.com/
Thanks. Picked up both of them.
