On Sat, 2016-07-30 at 18:04 +1000, Edward O'Callaghan wrote:
>
> On 07/30/2016 10:25 AM, Timothy Arceri wrote:
> > ---
> > Not sure is we need to be more careful about mentioning we support
> > 4.4
> > thoughts?
> s/is/if/
>
> Well in fact, any reason why we can't actually claim 4.5 support now
On Saturday, July 30, 2016 10:25:09 AM PDT Timothy Arceri wrote:
> ---
> Not sure is we need to be more careful about mentioning we support 4.4
> thoughts?
Looks good to me.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
mesa
On 07/30/2016 10:25 AM, Timothy Arceri wrote:
> ---
> Not sure is we need to be more careful about mentioning we support 4.4
> thoughts?
s/is/if/
Well in fact, any reason why we can't actually claim 4.5 support now?
The raw base requirements seem to be fulfilled at least.
Reviewed-by: Edward
---
Not sure is we need to be more careful about mentioning we support 4.4
thoughts?
docs/relnotes/12.1.0.html | 7 ---
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/docs/relnotes/12.1.0.html b/docs/relnotes/12.1.0.html
index e7c3a52..3935bb0 100644
--- a/docs/relnotes/12.1.
