Re: vm status update

[Neil Jerram]

address@hidden (Ludovic Courtès) writes:

>> Anyway, that's where I am. Bug-wise we still have a bug in backtraces,
>> which I need to pin down at some point, and update docs -- but generally
>> speaking we're mergeable. What do people think, should I be working on
>> master at some point?
>
> Sure.  Neil: what do you think?

No problem, I'm happy for Andy to merge now.  (When I mentioned holding
off before, that was while I was looking at branch_release-1-8..master
differences, and I have the results of that saved off somewhere.)

>  Looking at `vm', it's been sometime
> since the last merge with `master', so it'd be worth checking that
> things still work.

I guess that would mean merging master into vm first, and checking
that, then merging vm into master.

Regards,
        Neil