search

remotestorage / spec

remoteStorage Protocol Specification
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-dejong-remotestorage
87 stars 5 forks source link

Changes in draft-dejong-remotestorage-06 but not in source.txt #129

Closed untitaker closed 8 years ago

untitaker commented 8 years ago

@michielbdejong You accidentally pushed #127 to master.

untitaker commented 8 years ago

argh nvm I get it

untitaker commented 8 years ago

No, actually there's still a problem. @fkooman's commits changed draft-dejong-remotestorage-06, but not source, and you merged those broken commits untouched to master.

michielbdejong commented 8 years ago

Difference between source.txt and the built release file fixed with https://github.com/remotestorage/spec/commit/9e14a6e87a1209f85958421cb984348e5c5731e0, right?

I also moved the built release files to a release/ folder, to make it less confusing in the future.

you merged those broken commits untouched to master.

AFAICS, no commits were accidentally merged from https://github.com/remotestorage/spec/pull/127 but please open an issue if there were any, so we can fix that for the 07 spec. I just checked the top one, da00a4a, and that one is unmerged (instead I opened #135 about that).

untitaker commented 8 years ago

LGTM

On 1 December 2015 09:02:06 CET, Michiel de Jong notifications@github.com wrote:

Difference between source.txt and the built release file fixed with https://github.com/remotestorage/spec/commit/9e14a6e87a1209f85958421cb984348e5c5731e0, right?

I also moved the built release files to a release/ folder, to make it less confusing in the future.

you merged those broken commits untouched to master.

AFAICS, no commits were accidentally merged from https://github.com/remotestorage/spec/pull/127 but please open an issue if there were any, so we can fix that for the 07 spec. I just checked the top one, da00a4a, and that one is unmerged (instead I opened #135 about that).

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/remotestorage/spec/issues/129#issuecomment-160888506

Sent from my phone. Please excuse my brevity.