On Tue, 26 Jun 2012 04:59:17 + (UTC)
Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
> Ryan Hill posted on Mon, 25 Jun 2012 22:57:30 -0600 as excerpted:
>
> > On Mon, 14 May 2012 19:58:13 +0100 Markos Chandras
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On 05/14/2012 06:03 PM, hasufell wrote:
> >> > So, I will file a documen
On 06/26/2012 06:59 AM, Duncan wrote:
> Ryan Hill posted on Mon, 25 Jun 2012 22:57:30 -0600 as excerpted:
>
>> On Mon, 14 May 2012 19:58:13 +0100 Markos Chandras
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 05/14/2012 06:03 PM, hasufell wrote:
So, I will file a documentation bug unless someone can point me in
t
Ryan Hill posted on Mon, 25 Jun 2012 22:57:30 -0600 as excerpted:
> On Mon, 14 May 2012 19:58:13 +0100 Markos Chandras
> wrote:
>
>> On 05/14/2012 06:03 PM, hasufell wrote:
>> > So, I will file a documentation bug unless someone can point me in
>> > the right direction. I didn't find a reference
On Mon, 14 May 2012 19:58:13 +0100
Markos Chandras wrote:
> On 05/14/2012 06:03 PM, hasufell wrote:
> > So, I will file a documentation bug unless someone can point me in
> > the right direction. I didn't find a reference to that issue.
> Open a bug, write a devmanual patch and I will be happy t
On 14/05/12 23:42, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wrote:
I personally think that if an upstream says that no warnings must be
produced by the code, and a developer should look at them before
declaring any warnings safe, then that is best followed.
Upstream does not need to take into account warni
