Martin Ågren [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
Is this ready for 'next'?
I am not aware of any open questions or issues. You thought out loud
about how the series was structured, in particular about introducing a
successful test, then redefining it, as opposed to introducing it as a
failing test, then making it succeed. I hope I managed to motivate my
choice better in v2 (which is what you have picked up).
Duy wondered if it was sane to use a pager when we know that we are
"--get"-ing at most one config item. In v2, I addressed this by turning
on paging for a more careful selection of "--get"-ters.
Yeah, I am aware of these exchanges, and they are resolved nicely, I
think. I was mostly asking if other people have concerns we haven't
thought of yet.
Let's merge this to 'next', then.
Thanks.