Nicolas François writes ("Re: Breaks is going to be implemented"):
> Not my patch, but there is a patch for #170825 (and #20471, #217862,
> #270545) in the BTS.Ah, yes, that old chestnut. Thanks for the pointer. > The patch currently in the BTS is failing, and I don't know if it's > maintained, so don't stop for it. Quite. I think #170825 should be fixed but I don't want to take time now to review and perhaps correct the patch in #170825, so I will proceed without it. I suppose making the patch from #170825 not apply any more could be considered an advantage, since it's currently believed not to be correct :-). Regards, Ian.
