On 2020/02/28 23:31:17, Dan Eble wrote: > This does not look good. I expect this change to break the feature I added in > 0d72930e579a5784ecb26da2f9880d8c9da05e71 (Issue 5635). Well, a call to strip > (None) is possibly evidence that someone already broke it, but let's at least > avoid making it worse. > > I don't believe you really want a validator to pretend that a missing file > exists.
[now with the "send mail" option checked] https://codereview.appspot.com/583590043/
