Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Revert iterative nuts #1422

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Oct 3, 2016
Merged

Revert iterative nuts #1422

merged 2 commits into from
Oct 3, 2016

Conversation

twiecki
Copy link
Member

@twiecki twiecki commented Oct 3, 2016 •
edited
Loading

springcoil
springcoil approved these changes Oct 3, 2016
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@springcoil springcoil left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM if this passes the tests

@twiecki twiecki mentioned this pull request Oct 3, 2016
Closed
@springcoil
Copy link
Contributor

Maybe @ColCarroll should look at this too - I never saw he was assigned.

@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Oct 3, 2016 •
edited
Loading

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+0.004%) to 83.81% when pulling 60d207f on revert_iterative_nuts into 67a66a8 on master.

@ColCarroll ColCarroll merged commit bd32ce2 into master Oct 3, 2016
@ColCarroll
Copy link
Member

Spent some time yesterday trying to fix this, and it is complicated -- not sure when/if a fix will be available.

@twiecki twiecki deleted the revert_iterative_nuts branch October 3, 2016 11:31
@twiecki
Copy link
Member Author

twiecki commented Oct 3, 2016

@ColCarroll thanks, we can give it another try if/when you get it to work.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@springcoil springcoil springcoil approved these changes

Assignees

@ColCarroll ColCarroll

Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
4 participants
@twiecki @springcoil @coveralls @ColCarroll