On Tue, 16 Dec 2014 16:52:06 -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
On 12/16/14 2:10 PM, Luc Maisonobe wrote:
Hi all,
Can we consider MATH-1173 is solved,
Not sure. Gilles asked for review. Has anyone had a careful look?
"Fix version" set to 4.0.
If in the meantime a bug is uncovered, we'll just have t
On 12/16/14 2:10 PM, Luc Maisonobe wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Can we consider MATH-1173 is solved,
Not sure. Gilles asked for review. Has anyone had a careful look?
> and postpone MATH-1146,
Fixed.
> MATH-1153
> (I was not able to integrate the patch without breaking other tests)
Per comments on the
On 12/16/2014 10:10 PM, Luc Maisonobe wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Can we consider MATH-1173 is solved, and postpone MATH-1146, MATH-1153
> (I was not able to integrate the patch without breaking other tests),
> MATH-1158 (I don' tunderstand from the discussion if the patch
> completely breaks compatibili
On 16 December 2014 at 21:10, Luc Maisonobe wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Can we consider MATH-1173 is solved, and postpone MATH-1146, MATH-1153
> (I was not able to integrate the patch without breaking other tests),
> MATH-1158 (I don' tunderstand from the discussion if the patch
> completely breaks compa
Hi all,
Can we consider MATH-1173 is solved, and postpone MATH-1146, MATH-1153
(I was not able to integrate the patch without breaking other tests),
MATH-1158 (I don' tunderstand from the discussion if the patch
completely breaks compatibility or if part of it can be applied),
MATH-1172 (which has
