From a1608251e35c26be2b352bea04f2f9804d5a549d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: "http://zjs.name/" <http://zjs.name/@web>
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 00:24:49 +0000
Subject: [PATCH 1/2]

---
 ...uts_no_informaiton_for_unlocked_files.mdwn | 44 +++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 44 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 doc/bugs/whereis_outputs_no_informaiton_for_unlocked_files.mdwn

diff --git a/doc/bugs/whereis_outputs_no_informaiton_for_unlocked_files.mdwn b/doc/bugs/whereis_outputs_no_informaiton_for_unlocked_files.mdwn
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..cb8519952b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/doc/bugs/whereis_outputs_no_informaiton_for_unlocked_files.mdwn
@@ -0,0 +1,44 @@
+What steps will reproduce the problem?
+
+    ...:/tmp$ mkdir repro
+    ...:/tmp$ cd repro/
+    ...:/tmp/repro$ git init
+    Initialized empty Git repository in /tmp/repro/.git/
+    ...:/tmp/repro$ git annex init test
+    init test ok
+    ...:/tmp/repro$ echo "A" > a.txt
+    ...:/tmp/repro$ git annex add a.txt
+    add a.txt (checksum...) ok
+    (Recording state in git...)
+    ...:/tmp/repro$ git commit -m "add file"
+    [master (root-commit) bf53ce2] add file
+     1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
+     create mode 120000 a.txt
+    ...:/tmp/repro$ git annex whereis a.txt
+    whereis a.txt (1 copy) 
+      	5c028c6a-2c5e-11e2-bb9c-17bd7ce81377 -- here (test)
+    ok
+    ...:/tmp/repro$ git annex unlock a.txt
+    unlock a.txt (copying...) ok
+    ...:/tmp/repro$ git annex whereis a.txt
+
+What is the expected output? What do you see instead?
+
+    I'd expect that whereis executed on an unlocked file would behave like whereis executed on a locked file.
+
+What version of git-annex are you using? On what operating system?
+
+    $ cat /etc/issue
+    Ubuntu 12.04.1 LTS \n \l
+
+    $ git-annex version
+    git-annex version: 3.20120406
+    local repository version: 3
+    default repository version: 3
+    supported repository versions: 3
+    upgrade supported from repository versions: 0 1 2
+
+    $ uname -a
+    Linux ... 3.2.0-31-generic #50-Ubuntu SMP Fri Sep 7 16:16:45 UTC 2012 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
+
+Please provide any additional information below.

From 220a4fac7050b65615916514c3a75c577c290d4a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: 
 "https://www.google.com/accounts/o8/id?id=AItOawm5vDem1yeIu6uith5pxfb4mdKdIWVJpCs"
 <Louis@web>
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 02:02:17 +0000
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] Added a comment: Base64 vs. yEnc

---
 ...comment_1_ee1361e6b235f4e1c00596ba516b519a._comment | 10 ++++++++++
 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 doc/design/assistant/blog/day_126__mr_watson_come_here/comment_1_ee1361e6b235f4e1c00596ba516b519a._comment

diff --git a/doc/design/assistant/blog/day_126__mr_watson_come_here/comment_1_ee1361e6b235f4e1c00596ba516b519a._comment b/doc/design/assistant/blog/day_126__mr_watson_come_here/comment_1_ee1361e6b235f4e1c00596ba516b519a._comment
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..47766dc778
--- /dev/null
+++ b/doc/design/assistant/blog/day_126__mr_watson_come_here/comment_1_ee1361e6b235f4e1c00596ba516b519a._comment
@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
+[[!comment format=mdwn
+ username="https://www.google.com/accounts/o8/id?id=AItOawm5vDem1yeIu6uith5pxfb4mdKdIWVJpCs"
+ nickname="Louis"
+ subject="Base64 vs. yEnc"
+ date="2012-11-12T02:02:17Z"
+ content="""
+Would yEnc be a suitable alternative to base64 for encoding the binary transfers over XMPP?  Or why not?
+
+Thanks!
+"""]]