On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 11:12:51AM +0900, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demar...@intel.com> writes: > > >> Yes, I agree on both counts (i.e. it was totally unclear what > >> problem is being solved and what the root cause of the problem is, > >> and we would want a new test to protect this "fix" from getting > >> broken in the future. > > > > have you seen I sent a v2 with proper test? > > No, otherwise I wouln't have said it needs tests, and no, because I > haven't seen the v2, I do not know if it came with proper test or > other issues pointed out and fixes suggested in the review round > were addressed in v2. Sorry.
Your reply arrived just a little after I sent the v2, so I thought it was just the race and you would end up seeing the unread email in the same thread. Sorry for not including the msg id: 20181011081750.24240-1-lucas.demar...@intel.com thanks Lucas De Marchi > > When you ask such a question, please accompany it with "this is the > message-id" to avoid the receiver of the question locating a wrong > version of your patch from the archive. > > Thanks.
