Message67296
| Author | pitrou |
|---|---|
| Recipients | barry, benjamin.peterson, collinwinter, jyasskin, pitrou |
| Date | 2008-05-24.12:53:12 |
| SpamBayes Score | 0.11453287 |
| Marked as misclassified | No |
| Message-id | <1211633593.83.0.497656542853.issue2507@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
I don't think so. As Amaury pointed in #2833, the original re-raising behaviour which got changed by fixing the present bug was rather broken in its own way. Anyway, I think the question better be asked on the ML because any solution for the re-raising behaviour will require some significant trickery in the compiler and the eval loop. |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2008-05-24 12:53:14 | pitrou | set | spambayes_score: 0.114533 -> 0.11453287 recipients: + pitrou, barry, collinwinter, jyasskin, benjamin.peterson |
| 2008-05-24 12:53:13 | pitrou | set | spambayes_score: 0.114533 -> 0.114533 messageid: <1211633593.83.0.497656542853.issue2507@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2008-05-24 12:53:13 | pitrou | link | issue2507 messages |
| 2008-05-24 12:53:12 | pitrou | create | |