Re: Ruby bindings failure, perhaps related to __?

Branko Čibej wrote:
> On 27.09.2018 19:02, Julian Foad wrote:
> > [...] maybe it would be better to just not create the "XShelf" short name [...]
> >
> > But also I want to remember that the priority right now is to get 1.11 out with something that works, first, and then improve it later.
>
> If we keep the XName form in, we have to document that these classes are
> experimental and all the usual disclaimers apply.

Now I've changed it to not create a short name like "XShelf" at all. A long name like Svn::Ext::Client::Svn_client__shelf_t is still available.

I think that will be sufficient for 1.11 now, won't it?

Can someone review the updated backport nomination please?

-- 
- Julian