From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7ABC7431FC2 for ; Sat, 2 Nov 2013 06:18:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[none] autolearn=disabled Received: from olra.theworths.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (olra.theworths.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 94ho8KzEB3n7 for ; Sat, 2 Nov 2013 06:18:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from yantan.tethera.net (yantan.tethera.net [199.188.72.155]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BDBE1431FAF for ; Sat, 2 Nov 2013 06:18:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from remotemail by yantan.tethera.net with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1Vcb5Z-000613-1j; Sat, 02 Nov 2013 10:18:05 -0300 Received: (nullmailer pid 25543 invoked by uid 1000); Sat, 02 Nov 2013 13:18:00 -0000 From: David Bremner To: Felipe Contreras , Felipe Contreras , notmuch@notmuchmail.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] General fixes In-Reply-To: <5274ed4d5126a_46fcefbe747f@nysa.notmuch> References: <1380558523-6913-1-git-send-email-felipe.contreras@gmail.com> <87txgpv16s.fsf@zancas.localnet> <5274ed4d5126a_46fcefbe747f@nysa.notmuch> User-Agent: Notmuch/0.16+111~ga7964c8 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/24.3.1 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Date: Sat, 02 Nov 2013 10:18:00 -0300 Message-ID: <87d2mjrlh3.fsf@zancas.localnet> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 02 Nov 2013 13:18:12 -0000 Felipe Contreras writes: > David Bremner wrote: >> Felipe Contreras writes: >> >> > Felipe Contreras (3): >> > query: bind queries to database objects >> > ruby: allow build with RUNPATH >> > ruby: bind database close()/destroy() properly >> >> I agree with the discussion on IRC that the change in the first patch >> makes sense. > > Shall I push it to the master branch then? sure. > I don't really care that much about patch #2, but #3 should probably be > applied. Just to be clear, I wasn't objecting to patch 2, just asking for a few more words of commit message. For patch 3, since it's ruby specific and nobody complained, I'd say go for it. Cheers, d