Sounds right. On Sat, Aug 4, 2012 at 5:16 PM, Gilles Sadowski < gil...@harfang.homelinux.org> wrote:
> > > No strong objections, but I see it as needless code bloat > > personally. Also, without changing visibility (which I am -1 on) > > for the inner class, I don't see an easy way to add tests for the > > proposed new code. > > Then I would rephrase: > Has anyone an objection to resolving MATH-610 as "Won't fix"?
