On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 3:37 PM, John Keeping <[email protected]> wrote:
> Care to be more specific?  I think this behaviour is the same as the
> code it replaces.

You're right -- I sent the follow-up email to say "whoops, that's not
the code that's bad. It's this code instead, below."

_______________________________________________
cgit mailing list
[email protected]
http://hjemli.net/mailman/listinfo/cgit

Reply via email to