Re: predecessor count for the root node-revision is wrong message

From: Jason Wong <jwong1mail_at_gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2012 13:41:19 -0700

Hello Daniel, Philip.

I have been following the thread: "#4129 is reproducible Re:
predecessor count for the root node-revision is wrong message".
It looks like you all have it figured out now. Good job.

Do you need any more information from me at this point? Thanks.

Jason Wong.
Received on 2012-03-19 21:41:53 CET

This message: [ Message body ]
Next message: Daniel Shahaf: "Re: predecessor count for the root node-revision is wrong message"
Previous message: Daniel Shahaf: "Re: #4129 is reproducible Re: predecessor count for the root node-revision is wrong message"
In reply to: Philip Martin: "Re: predecessor count for the root node-revision is wrong message"
Next in thread: Daniel Shahaf: "Re: predecessor count for the root node-revision is wrong message"
Reply: Daniel Shahaf: "Re: predecessor count for the root node-revision is wrong message"

Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ] [ by messages with attachments ]