On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 1:34 PM, Markus Neteler <[email protected]> wrote:
> Unless there are other implications, a backport of r65438 would be good.

Right, the change should be save therefore backported in r65439.

Have a nice day.

Pietro
_______________________________________________
grass-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev

Reply via email to