Skip to content

Conversation

grzuy
Copy link
Contributor

@grzuy grzuy commented Feb 7, 2018

@hsbt
Copy link
Member

hsbt commented Feb 9, 2018

I'm not sure why your specification was correct behavior. I will continue to see watch #92.

@grzuy
Copy link
Contributor Author

grzuy commented Feb 21, 2018

Thanks @hsbt

Were you able to see comments in #92?
Do you have any opinion about it?

@grzuy
Copy link
Contributor Author

grzuy commented Feb 22, 2018

Hi @hsbt

There hasn't been an agreement on issue #92 yet, so in order to move forward i opened a new PR #257, that replaces this one, which still fixes issue #246 but with a different approach that keeps requested behavior in issue #92, instead of reverting it.

@grzuy grzuy closed this Feb 22, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants