Re: What should go into 1.5.7?
Sorry, I think you got my comment wrong.
"Violently agree" is an ironic term in some circles for people who
claim they disagree, but actually say the same thing with different
words.
(Which seemed to be the case here.)
Regards,
--
Thomas Roessler · Personal soap box at <http://log.does-not-exist.org/>.
On 2005-01-27 23:26:45 +0900, TAKAHASHI Tamotsu wrote:
> From: TAKAHASHI Tamotsu <ttakah@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: mutt-dev@xxxxxxxx
> Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 23:26:45 +0900
> Subject: Re: What should go into 1.5.7?
> Mail-Followup-To: mutt-dev@xxxxxxxx
> X-Spam-Level:
>
> My long reply seemed rejected by listserver or something two times.
> So I'm writing this message as simple as possible.
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 26, 2005 at 05:53:18PM +0100, Thomas Roessler wrote:
> > On 2005-01-26 10:46:38 -0600, Charles Cazabon wrote:
> >
> > > > But I don't think we need notalternates.
> > >
> > > I disagree.
> >
> > Actually, I think you both violently agree that unalternates should
> > do what noalternates does.
>
> I didn't intend to be violent.
> I apologize if you felt I was violent. I am sorry.
> I don't bother you on this topic any more.
>
> I don't (and didn't) object to inclusion of that patch.
>
> --
> tamo
>
>