Hi Jameson. On Thu, 02 Feb 2012 10:00:59 -0800, Jameson Graef Rollins <[email protected]> wrote: > Hey, Dmitry. I'm so sorry I sent my last email on your original patch > before I saw this new series.
No problems. > I do now like your original proposal > better, since it shows the diff based the names the caller provides, > which I now agree is probably the clearest and most robust solution. > The second patch in this series could still go through, though, no > matter what version of the change to test_expect_equal_file we go with. > Ok. I am going to wait for some time (e.g. 2 days) for more opinions. Though, I doubt I would get any :) (And the problem is really minor, so it probably does not deserve much attention.) Currently, it seems that the original approach [1] wins. Regards, Dmitry [1] id:"[email protected]" > jamie. _______________________________________________ notmuch mailing list [email protected] http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch
