On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 4:04 PM, Michael Paquier
<michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:
> Wouldn't the definition of a new redo action make sense then? Say
> SKIPPED. None of the existing actions match the non-apply case.
I just took 5 minutes to look at the code and reason about it, and
something like what your patch is doing would be actually fine. Still
I don't think that checking for the apply flag in the macro routine
should look for has_image. Let's keep things separate.
--
Michael
