On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 8:02 AM, Shea Levy <[email protected]> wrote:
> globin missed the fact that the naming convention is messing up the
> lowPrio logic, and your original PR had nothing to do with that. If rust
> were named properly, your fix would be wrong.

What is the exact naming scheme that rust should adopt?

I will make a pull request to fix this.

> Even in this case where
> your fix is harmless (which globin reasonably missed), it doesn't
> actually fix your issue and in the event that the rust naming is fixed
> it would be harmful then.

Secondly, I want to test this harmful aspect. What is the expected
harmful behaviour if I follow the steps to reproduce i.e.: correctly
name each rust and remove lowprio?
_______________________________________________
nix-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev

Reply via email to