Ack. Would continue with the backport then :).
On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 2:22 PM, Chetan Mehrotra
wrote:
> Its was +0 ;)
> Chetan Mehrotra
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 2:15 PM, Vikas Saurabh
> wrote:
>> Hi Chetan,
>>
>> Was your concern a -1
Its was +0 ;)
Chetan Mehrotra
On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 2:15 PM, Vikas Saurabh wrote:
> Hi Chetan,
>
> Was your concern a -1 or a +/- 0?
>
> Thanks,
> Vikas
Hi Chetan,
Was your concern a -1 or a +/- 0?
Thanks,
Vikas
On 13/09/2017 09:22, Vikas Saurabh wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 9:32 AM, Chetan Mehrotra
> wrote:
>
>> Would the backport be of use now? As any upgrade I think would happen
>> first to initial release from that branch where this fix would not be
>> present
>
Hi,
On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 9:32 AM, Chetan Mehrotra
wrote:
> Would the backport be of use now? As any upgrade I think would happen
> first to initial release from that branch where this fix would not be
> present
Well, from arguments pov, I think one can always