Carsten Dominik writes:
> On 7.5.2011, at 17:20, Bert Burgemeister wrote:
>
>> Matt Lundin writes:
>>
>>> Bert Burgemeister writes:
>>>
Just curious, is there anything I should have known that prevented the
patch submitted in http://article.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.orgmode/39313,
>>>
On 7.5.2011, at 17:20, Bert Burgemeister wrote:
> Matt Lundin writes:
>
>> Bert Burgemeister writes:
>>
>>> Just curious, is there anything I should have known that prevented the
>>> patch submitted in http://article.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.orgmode/39313,
>>
>> Is it still in the bugtracker, o
Matt Lundin writes:
> Bert Burgemeister writes:
>
>> Just curious, is there anything I should have known that prevented the
>> patch submitted in http://article.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.orgmode/39313,
>
> Is it still in the bugtracker, or was it rejected?
Yes, and no.
> With your patch, what woul
Bert Burgemeister writes:
> Just curious, is there anything I should have known that prevented the
> patch submitted in http://article.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.orgmode/39313,
Is it still in the bugtracker, or was it rejected? (I attempted to check
myself, but the patchwork site seems to be down rig
Carsten Dominik writes:
> Patch 781 (http://patchwork.newartisans.com/patch/781/) is now "Accepted".
>
> Maintainer comment: none
>
> This relates to the following submission:
>
> http://mid.gmane.org/%3C87aaf3tv5l.fsf%40fastmail.fm%3E
>
> Here is the original message containing the patch:
>
>> C
