On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 06:50:27PM +0100, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > I gave this some light reading earlier, and left a few nit-y comments > along the way. This isn't my area of expertise, but without giving it > much of a deep look this all looked good to me. Thanks so much! > I don't see a reason not to carry this forward, with or without > addressing any of the nits I brought up. I responded to your comments throughout this thread, but the "executive summary" is that I think we're OK to continue with this version as-is. Could I get an ACK from either Stolee or Jonathan Tan that this version looks OK? Thanks, Taylor
