Ihor Radchenko writes: > Kyle Meyer <[email protected]> writes: > >> Based on the patch (and on the original Emacs commit, 481ad70d5cb), I >> expected 90ce752f3 to also include the changes below. Were those >> intentionally left out? > > Let me know if you want me to apply those on bugfix.
Based on your reply, my understanding is that you didn't drop those parts of the patch intentionally when applying the changes. (To be clear, these changes were in the patch that Paul sent in <[email protected]> but didn't make it into the applied commit.) I've applied those changes on bugfix (13e035072). As you said up-thread (in a message from before the 9.8 release), we generally wouldn't rename functions on bugfix, but I think it makes sense in this case (given the sister renames that happened as part of Org 9.8 and the state in Emacs's tree). Of course, please adjust as you see fit. Thanks.
