Re: [PATCH v2] doc: imply that interactive.singleKey is disabled by default

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Dragan Simic <dsimic@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> On 2024-06-01 00:21, Dragan Simic wrote:
>> On 2024-05-31 19:23, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>>> Dragan Simic <dsimic@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>>> Just checking, is there something left to be addressed for this
>>>> patch,
>>>> before it can be considered to be pulled into the next branch?
>>> Thanks for pinging, as these small things were on the back burner
>>> while preparing for updates to maintenance tracks.
>>> Apparently v2 cannot be pulled into the next branch, and I forgot
>>> if
>>> I saw v3 already.  In general, unless I explicitly say there is no
>>> need to resend (sometimes with conditions), I'd expect an updated
>>> iteration sent to the list.
>> I see, but I'm not really sure is there need for the v3?  Maybe the
>> patch description could be tweaked a bit further, but I wasn't under
>> impression that you asked for that to be done?  Am I wrong there?
>
> Any chances, please, to have a look at this?

I _have_ taken a look---as I said, "I saw v3 already".

Unless you were asking other folks, that is, but the message was
addressed to me with others CC'ed, so I am not sure what the true
intention was.





[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux