Quoth David Bremner on Mar 10 at 10:09 am:
> 
> As usual, nothing brings out the bug reports like a freeze.
> 
> There are some patches that should probably go in, but could use one
> more pair of eyes.
> 
>   id:"[email protected]"

I looked at this and just sent a question to Jani
  id:"[email protected]"
If the answer is that it's okay, then consider my eyes one more pair.

> We had a somewhat lively debate about desirablity of the following
> patch. My decision is that for now, we avoid changing the behaviour of
> notmuch, and do apply the patch. We can discuss later deprecating or
> changing this permissive behaviour. 
> 
>    id:"[email protected]"

Alternatively, can we just require GMime 2.6.7 by applying
  id:"[email protected]"
instead of
  id:"[email protected]"
and
  id:"[email protected]"
?

> This patch from Austin seems innocent enough, and I plan to push it to
> release.
>  
>    id:"[email protected]"

The worst-case scenario with applying this patch is that notmuch will
verbosely fail to show a message where it would otherwise crash, so
I'd go for it.

> I'm not sure about including
> 
>   id:"[email protected]"
> 
> it wouldn't really help debian (as the unstable buildds already have
> 2.6.6), but I guess it might help others building debian packages.

(See my comment about 2.6.7 above.)

> Although
> 
>     id:"[email protected]"
> 
> is marked as trivial and is certainly short, I'd like one more pair of
> eyes before pushing to release.

I approve this patch.
_______________________________________________
notmuch mailing list
[email protected]
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch

Reply via email to