On 31.01.25 00:36, Alistair Popple wrote:
On Wed, Jan 29, 2025 at 12:54:05PM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote:
It's unclear why they would be considered migration entries; they are
not.
Yeah, I agree that doesn't seem right. I suspect I was initially modelling
device exclusive entries similar to migration entries but obviously went too
far. So thanks for fixing:
Reviewed-by: Alistair Popple <apopple@xxxxxxxxxx>
Thanks ... fixing all the wrong use of "device-private" in the
subject+description ... not sure what my mind was doing there.
It's all about "device-exclusive" of course.
--
Cheers,
David / dhildenb
