From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1MIoYp-0008Bx-DR
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 22 Jun 2009 14:48:07 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1MIoYk-00089o-JI
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 22 Jun 2009 14:48:06 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=50533 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MIoYk-00089e-DB
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 22 Jun 2009 14:48:02 -0400
Received: from mtaout01-winn.ispmail.ntl.com ([81.103.221.47]:18342)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <sdbrady@ntlworld.com>) id 1MIoYf-00026P-4N
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 22 Jun 2009 14:48:02 -0400
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 19:47:44 +0100
From: Stuart Brady <sdbrady@ntlworld.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] cocoa.m issues fixed
Message-ID: <20090622184744.GA3626@miranda.arrow>
References: <bd18a40b73fc236ecd330f0b5e433cee@gmail.com>
	<61E57A9F-6D9A-4DF3-9CE6-0B8056DD1C60@web.de>
	<f2501d88dd652bd9df9dc16cbae3cee5@gmail.com>
	<4A3E5071.7080407@redhat.com>
	<f43fc5580906211107l6654103bu98c728ad2bbaadbe@mail.gmail.com>
	<20090622170515.GA29636@miranda.arrow>
	<f43fc5580906221035i1203c8b0h98df38888b43e050@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <f43fc5580906221035i1203c8b0h98df38888b43e050@mail.gmail.com>
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Blue Swirl <blauwirbel@gmail.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 08:35:29PM +0300, Blue Swirl wrote:
> On 6/22/09, Stuart Brady <sdbrady@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> > Why are the birds being brought back to life, anyway?  I thouht they idea
> >  was to kill two birds with one stone?
> 
> Yes, but since the maintainer reversed the patch, the birds and the
> kitten were magically resurrected.

So you mean, bring the kitten and the birds back to life, and then kill
the birds again?  *Mind boggles*.  Ah.  Perhaps that was the point. :-)

(I see now that the birds would have to be revived, by necessity rather
than by choice, unless the correct stones are found in a timely manner.)

> >  Consider the lily?!  He's having a go at the flowers, now! ;-)
> 
> ENOPARSE

Just a reference to Monty Python's Life of Brian, is all. :-)

> >   * Improves the likelihood that maintainers will consider your patch
> >    to be reviewable, and then actually review it and apply it, if those
> >    maintainers lack the time to review all patches that are submitted.
> 
> +1 for this one.

Ah, I thought that one might prove popular. :-)

Cheers,
-- 
Stuart Brady