Hi Tom.
On Thu, 15 Dec 2011 10:27:33 -0700, Tom Prince
wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Dec 2011 08:14:08 -0400, David Bremner
> wrote:
> > On Mon, 4 Jul 2011 05:59:03 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin > gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Result: nothing happens except for "No URL at point" message
> > >
> > > Expected
On Thu, 15 Dec 2011 08:14:08 -0400, David Bremner da...@tethera.net wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2011 05:59:03 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin
dmitry.kuroch...@gmail.com wrote:
Result: nothing happens except for No URL at point message
Expected result: the second message is shown/hidden
On Thu, 15 Dec 2011 08:14:08 -0400, David Bremner wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Jul 2011 05:59:03 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin gmail.com> wrote:
> > Result: nothing happens except for "No URL at point" message
> >
> > Expected result: the second message is shown/hidden
>
> Unfortunately this patch is
On Mon, 4 Jul 2011 05:59:03 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin
dmitry.kuroch...@gmail.com wrote:
Result: nothing happens except for No URL at point message
Expected result: the second message is shown/hidden
Unfortunately this patch is unreliable, reporting BROKEN for some
environments and FIXED for
On Mon, 03 Oct 2011 14:39:36 +0200, Thomas Jost schno...@schnouki.net wrote:
Non-text part: multipart/signed
About adding prereqs to the test suite -- in my private branch I have a
rebased and fixed version of the patch series sent by Pieter Praet [1].
It worked fine last time I tested it on
Hi Thomas.
On Mon, 03 Oct 2011 14:39:36 +0200, Thomas Jost
wrote:
> On Sun, 02 Oct 2011 05:45:53 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin gmail.com> wrote:
> > BTW there were patches to support tmux (or maybe it was dtach). IIRC
> > the consensus was that supporting it does not worth complicating test
> >
On Sun, 02 Oct 2011 05:45:53 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin wrote:
> BTW there were patches to support tmux (or maybe it was dtach). IIRC
> the consensus was that supporting it does not worth complicating test
> lib. I think this can be reconsidered if it turns out that many users
> do not have
On Mon, 03 Oct 2011 14:39:36 +0200, Thomas Jost
wrote:
Non-text part: multipart/signed
>
> About adding prereqs to the test suite -- in my private branch I have a
> rebased and fixed version of the patch series sent by Pieter Praet [1].
> It worked fine last time I tested it on a system without
Hi David.
On Sat, 01 Oct 2011 08:51:20 -0300, David Bremner wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 21:25:08 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin gmail.com> wrote:
> > Most likely the test passes because emacs is run in server mode and
> > visibility stuff works differently. I sent a patch series [1] to run
> > emacs
On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 21:25:08 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin wrote:
> Most likely the test passes because emacs is run in server mode and
> visibility stuff works differently. I sent a patch series [1] to run
> emacs in screen exactly for this reason. Please consider pushing it.
> Then the test should
On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 21:25:08 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin
dmitry.kuroch...@gmail.com wrote:
Most likely the test passes because emacs is run in server mode and
visibility stuff works differently. I sent a patch series [1] to run
emacs in screen exactly for this reason. Please consider pushing it.
Hi David.
On Sat, 01 Oct 2011 08:51:20 -0300, David Bremner da...@tethera.net wrote:
On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 21:25:08 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin
dmitry.kuroch...@gmail.com wrote:
Most likely the test passes because emacs is run in server mode and
visibility stuff works differently. I sent a
Hi David.
On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 08:01:16 -0300, David Bremner wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Jul 2011 05:59:03 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin gmail.com> wrote:
> > Result: nothing happens except for "No URL at point" message
> >
> > Expected result: the second message is shown/hidden
>
> I didn't track out why
On Mon, 4 Jul 2011 05:59:03 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin wrote:
> Result: nothing happens except for "No URL at point" message
>
> Expected result: the second message is shown/hidden
I didn't track out why so far, but this test is show as FIXED when
compiled in a Debian chroot.
see e.g.
Hi David.
On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 08:01:16 -0300, David Bremner da...@tethera.net wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2011 05:59:03 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin
dmitry.kuroch...@gmail.com wrote:
Result: nothing happens except for No URL at point message
Expected result: the second message is shown/hidden
I
Human-friendly scenario:
* open a thread where a message which ends with an HTML part is
followed by another message
* make the first message visible
* goto the beginning of the second message (first line, first colon)
* hit "RET"
Result: nothing happens except for "No URL at point" message
Human-friendly scenario:
* open a thread where a message which ends with an HTML part is
followed by another message
* make the first message visible
* goto the beginning of the second message (first line, first colon)
* hit RET
Result: nothing happens except for No URL at point message
17 matches
Mail list logo
