3 Mar
2024
3 Mar
'24
4:34 p.m.
On Sun Mar 3 16:08:52 2024 +0000, Vaxry wrote:
it does indeed fix the same issue, though the discussion on 667 has all but stalled, the patch is outdated, and this solution is smaller.
This patch lacks tests. The checks are too broad because it's smaller. Since it's broad, it affects cases that *aren't* affected by the bug.
It's better to bump !667 instead. It tries to minimize impact on cases not affected by the bug (hence lowering risk of regressing other apps). Thanks.