Stefan Beller <sbeller@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > ... would call out patch 2 to be a bugfix that could > go independently, but the whole series is fine as-is with me. Good eyes. I agree that it makes sense to treat 2/3 as a follow-up fix for an already graduated topic, and make the other two depend on a result of applying that first. In practice it should not matter all that much in this case, because the breakage is only in 'master' and is not going to be merged down to 'maint', but it nevertheless was a good point to raise. Thanks for carefully reading the patches through.
