Re: [PATCH 04/14] inetcomm: Add self-registration code.

[Detlef Riekenberg]

On Fr, 2007-11-02 at 13:46 +0000, Huw Davies wrote:
> +      NULL,

The char 0x0c looks wrong here.
(was already in the Patch from Rob)

The Patchset was send twice (xx/14 and xx/18) with the same times.

Example from Huw (Rob did the same before):
                           Subject: 
[PATCH 17/18] inetcomm: Add two
missing member functions.
                              Date: 
Fri, 2 Nov 2007 11:54:03 +0000
(12:54 CET)

Subject: 
[PATCH 13/14] inetcomm: Add two
missing member functions.
                              Date: 
Fri, 2 Nov 2007 11:54:03 +0000
(12:54 CET)

[PATCH 04/14] inetcomm: Add self-registration code.

[Robert Shearman]

Detlef Riekenberg wrote:
> On Fr, 2007-11-02 at 13:46 +0000, Huw Davies wrote:
> > +      NULL,
>
> The char 0x0c looks wrong here.
> (was already in the Patch from Rob)
>
> The Patchset was send twice (xx/14 and xx/18) with the same times.
>
> Example from Huw (Rob did the same before):

I just thought I'd note that while the From: header said these patches 
came from me, Huw actually sent them, which I think is a deficiency in 
some of the git tools. I suspect the time is also the same issue. Note 
that the reason the smaller xx/14 patchset was sent was in response to 
comments on wine-devel about issues with the SMTP patches.

[PATCH 04/14] inetcomm: Add self-registration code.

[Saulius Krasuckas]

* On Fri, 2 Nov 2007, Robert Shearman wrote:
> I just thought I'd note that while the From: header said these patches 
> came from me, Huw actually sent them, which I think is a deficiency in 
> some of the git tools. I suspect the time is also the same issue.

I may be writing this too late, but my MUA (pine) shows all the 
interesting info right there in the message view:

Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 11:35:34 +0000
From: Robert Shearman 
Reply-To: [e-mail]
To: wine-patches 
Subject: [PATCH 01/18] inetcomm: Add stub implementation of inetcomm.dll.
Resent-Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 12:21:28 +0000
Resent-From: [e-mail]
Resent-To: [e-mail]

So I already did know which it was sent (and then resent) by. :)
Well, maybe only time stamp was reset, I am not sure.