clone 676448 -1 retitle -1 consider unarchiving blocked/blocking bugs when forcemerging severity -1 wishlist thanks
On Thu, 07 Jun 2012, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Don Armstrong wrote: > > unarchive 631018 > > forcemerge 651912 647992 > [...] > > So 631018 is blocked by 647992 and is archived. > > Ah, now I see. Thanks. Would it make sense to automatically > unarchive blocked and merged bugs (other than the bugs explicitly > mentioned) when forcibly merging, since they are not likely to be > signs of typos? It's an option... but it would make the forcemerge code even more complicated. I guess it can be done, though... Don Armstrong -- "I was thinking seven figures," he said, "but I would have taken a hundred grand. I'm not a greedy person." [All for a moldy bottle of tropicana.] -- Sammi Hadzovic [in Andy Newman's 2003/02/14 NYT article.] http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/14/nyregion/14EYEB.html http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
