<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=windows-1252"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;"><br><div><div>Am 04.07.2014 um 21:49 schrieb Rémi Denis-Courmont <<a href="mailto:remi@remlab.net">remi@remlab.net</a>>:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div style="font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;">Le vendredi 4 juillet 2014, 21:36:18 David Fuhrmann a écrit :<br><blockquote type="cite">Hello Remi,<br><br>Am 04.07.2014 um 09:47 schrieb Rémi Denis-Courmont <<a href="mailto:remi@remlab.net">remi@remlab.net</a>>:<br><blockquote type="cite"> Hello,<br><br>Le 2014-07-04 00:52, David Fuhrmann a écrit :<br><blockquote type="cite">Generally, _please_ complain to the specific patches or issues you<br>are having a problem with. Doing that in a totally unrelated thread,<br>and weeks or months afterwards ist not really helpful.<br></blockquote><br>I cannot report issues before I find them (that would be two days ago on<br>Trac).<br></blockquote>Of course I have no problem if you find issues afterwards and after some<br>period of time. The more important point is that you should directly<br>answering to the appropriate mails (and to the right persons), instead if<br>misusing another dispute to express all your frustration you collected.<br></blockquote><br>I don't know about you, but I don't keep an permanent archive of the mailing<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br>list. And the public archives do not provide RFC2822 files for obvious antispam<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br>reasons. So I cannot "answer" to old emails.<br></div></blockquote><div><br></div>You can also create new mails with an appropriate right title. But I think you got my point.</div><div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div style="font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;"><blockquote type="cite">Thus I think it was reasonable to believe that the patch is<br>fine, seeing the explanation and your lack of reaction, the approval from<br>others, and the ease and low risk of regressions.<br></blockquote><br>Again, if someone says "Exactly", I assume they agree with me. Except you<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br>obviously did not agree.<br></div></blockquote><div><br></div>Yes, I was agreeing with the last part of your mail, but not with the first one. I think it is fair to assume that you read my complete mail.</div><div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div style="font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;"><br>There was no need to introduce a new flag, since the one existing flag is<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br>mathematically enough to describe both possible intents: keep oldest (UNIQUE)<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br>or replace with newest (zero).<br></div></blockquote><div><br></div></div>I already told you that UNIQUE was not working at all. start-time=0 is not the same string as start-time=10.<div>And regardless of the flag, the action is not a replace, but an append to an existing array, which got bigger and bigger.</div><div><br></div><div>And this is completely aside from the fact that only the last option of all "start-time=xx“ variants was actually in effect.</div><div><br></div><div>Regards,</div><div>David</div></body></html>