neomutt: update to 20231023 #46668
Merged
neomutt: update to 20231023 #46668
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
AnInternetTroll
force-pushed
the
user/luca/neomutt-20231006
branch
3 times, most recently
from
85137ba
to
010833a
Compare
AnInternetTroll
changed the title
AnInternetTroll
force-pushed
the
user/luca/neomutt-20231006
branch
from
010833a
to
edea5fe
Compare
AnInternetTroll
changed the title
AnInternetTroll
force-pushed
the
user/luca/neomutt-20231006
branch
from
edea5fe
to
f2bf752
Compare
|
@Vaelatern could you take a look? |
|
Adding a custom patch? That seems weird -- yes it's committed to upstream but I think I'd rather stay on 10-23 than carry the patch if needed to fix 11-03 |
Vaelatern
reviewed
Nov 16, 2023
| @@ -19,11 +19,12 @@ short_desc="Mutt with misc fixes and feature patches" | |||
| maintainer="Toyam Cox <Vaelatern@voidlinux.org>" | |||
| license="GPL-2.0-or-later" | |||
| homepage="https://neomutt.org/" | |||
| _test_files_hash=34f79ee9d91863a97f6e18700aea51157b8610cf | |||
| _test_files_hash=00efc8388110208e77e6ed9d8294dfc333753d54 | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I mean I guess you could do this... the reason I'd ignored it is the latest commit is a documentation only update. Not actually functionally required.
|
Can you please give clarity on that patch, which seems to fix a bug in 1103 that we could avoid by being on 1023 without a real loss of functionality, yes? |
|
On Thu, Nov 16, 2023 at 06:34:57AM -0800, Toyam Cox wrote:
@Vaelatern commented on this pull request.
> @@ -19,11 +19,12 @@ short_desc="Mutt with misc fixes and feature patches"
maintainer="Toyam Cox ***@***.***>"
license="GPL-2.0-or-later"
homepage="https://neomutt.org/"
-_test_files_hash=34f79ee9d91863a97f6e18700aea51157b8610cf
+_test_files_hash=00efc8388110208e77e6ed9d8294dfc333753d54
I mean I guess you could do this... the reason I'd ignored it is the latest commit is a documentation only update. Not actually functionally required.
Opsy, didn't really check the commit. Just wanted to make sure the
newest tests passed :D
I think I'll keep it just to not cause confusion in the future
|
|
On Sat, Nov 18, 2023 at 10:48:55PM -0800, Toyam Cox wrote:
Can you please give clarity on that patch, which seems to fix a bug in 1103 that we could avoid by being on 1023 without a real loss of functionality, yes?
Well 1103 does introduce like 4 new features. But it might be safer to
stay on 1023 until that patch comes in a full release.
Just tested 1023 and it doesn't require any patches to build and test
locally, so that seems like the best option.
|
AnInternetTroll
force-pushed
the
user/luca/neomutt-20231006
branch
from
f2bf752
to
35f9344
Compare
AnInternetTroll
changed the title
|
Thank you! |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Testing the changes
Local build testing