Re: Merging PR #616

+1

On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 3:36 AM, Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
wrote:

> Den 10. mai 2016 09:35, skrev Adam Bergkvist:
> > On 2016-05-10 08:55, Harald Alvestrand wrote:
> >> This is a big one.
> >>
> >> And it's pretty sure to invalidate every other PR in the queue (and vice
> >> versa).
> >>
> >> Should we merge this ASAP, and spend the time up to Thursday's call on
> >> rebasing the others?
> >>
> >> I think it's pretty important that we get this one in, and *currently*
> >> it merges without conflict.
> >
> > Right now we have quite a few PRs pending that would break. I just
> > talked to Dom and he said that PR #616 is mostly generated with a script
> > he has written. He said that it would be ok if we merge as much as we
> > can on Thursday and then give him a green light to generate a new WebIDL
> > conversion patch and commit it directly. That sounds good to me. What do
> > you guys think?
> >
>
>
> That sounds better to me, in fact.
>
> > /Adam
> >
>
>