Re: Emacs-diffs Digest, Vol 7, Issue 46

Re: Emacs-diffs Digest, Vol 7, Issue 46

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: emacs-diffs-request@gnu.org
> Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2003 05:48:24 -0400

It seems like something's wrong with the scripts that send diffs to
the emacs-diffs mailing list.  Since about yesterday, I'm getting
summaries like this:

> Today's Topics:
> 
>    1.  (Dave Love)
>    2.  (Dave Love)

(Dave's changes are not the only ones affected.)  Note the absence of
the file names that were changed.

Could someone please look into this?

Re: Emacs-diffs Digest, Vol 7, Issue 46

[Mathieu Roy]

"Eli Zaretskii" <eliz@elta.co.il> said:

> > From: emacs-diffs-request@gnu.org
> > Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2003 05:48:24 -0400
> 
> It seems like something's wrong with the scripts that send diffs to
> the emacs-diffs mailing list.  Since about yesterday, I'm getting
> summaries like this:
> 
> > Today's Topics:
> > 
> >    1.  (Dave Love)
> >    2.  (Dave Love)
> 
> (Dave's changes are not the only ones affected.)  Note the absence of
> the file names that were changed.
> 
> Could someone please look into this?


Paul, there's apparently an issue with  the new script, the subject is
truncated. 

This mail got correct subject (with "Changes to...") 
http://mail.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-diffs/2003-06/msg00634.html

but this mail is more recent than
http://mail.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-diffs/2003-06/msg00628.html

It seems to be already fixed by now.

Regards,



-- 
Mathieu Roy
 
  Homepage:
    http://yeupou.coleumes.org
  Not a native english speaker: 
    http://stock.coleumes.org/doc.php?i=/misc-files/flawed-english

Re: Emacs-diffs Digest, Vol 7, Issue 46

[Paul Fisher]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@elta.co.il> writes:

> (Dave's changes are not the only ones affected.)  Note the absence
> of the file names that were changed.

Fixed.  The subject was not set correctly on branches.

Re: Emacs-diffs Digest, Vol 7, Issue 46

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Paul Fisher <rao@gnu.org>
> Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2003 18:26:06 -0400
> 
> > (Dave's changes are not the only ones affected.)  Note the absence
> > of the file names that were changed.
> 
> Fixed.  The subject was not set correctly on branches.

Thanks.