>
> This is what he meant, what's the point of doing this as a short term
> fix when the full fix is both a) not much more work and b) there are
> objections to the existing patch?
>
> You put a patch up for review and then didn't respond to the review
> before you committed it.
>

Jim pointed out that this may have come across a bit more harsh than
was meant. It was meant to say "hey, there were some concerns over in
the original thread, can we go back to those first?".

We're doing that now so awesome.

-eric
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to