I am thinking the older versions in JIRA should also be archived (i.e.,
taken off the road map). That's still on the todo list, right?
Cheers,
Paul
On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 7:40 AM, Karl Heinz Marbaise
wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> >>> project too. Right now it's "Maven 2 & 3". It can either be "Maven 3"
Hi,
>>> project too. Right now it's "Maven 2 & 3". It can either be "Maven
3" or
simply "Maven". Thoughts?
Good point, clean up the JIRA frontpage of MNG. Do you have the
permission to do so? If yes, please proceed for "Maven".
+1
the Jira project description can be administered like other
Le mercredi 18 juin 2014 08:12:20 Michael Osipov a écrit :
> Am 2014-06-18 04:25, schrieb Paul Benedict:
> > Since 2.x is discontinued, this is our opportunity to rename the JIRA
> > project too. Right now it's "Maven 2 & 3". It can either be "Maven 3" or
> > simply "Maven". Thoughts?
>
> Good poi
Am 2014-06-18 04:25, schrieb Paul Benedict:
Since 2.x is discontinued, this is our opportunity to rename the JIRA
project too. Right now it's "Maven 2 & 3". It can either be "Maven 3" or
simply "Maven". Thoughts?
Good point, clean up the JIRA frontpage of MNG. Do you have the
permission to do
Since 2.x is discontinued, this is our opportunity to rename the JIRA
project too. Right now it's "Maven 2 & 3". It can either be "Maven 3" or
simply "Maven". Thoughts?
Cheers,
Paul
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 3:03 PM, Michael Osipov wrote:
> Am 2014-06-17 21:57, schrieb Jason van Zyl:
>
>
>> On
Am 2014-06-17 21:57, schrieb Jason van Zyl:
On Jun 17, 2014, at 3:47 PM, Michael Osipov
wrote:
Am 2014-06-17 21:14, schrieb Jason van Zyl:
Just start nuking/moving/cleaning if you think it makes sense.
Just did for 2.2.x. But are we going to relase 3.0.6 or 3.1.2? I
don't think so because
On Jun 17, 2014, at 3:47 PM, Michael Osipov wrote:
> Am 2014-06-17 21:14, schrieb Jason van Zyl:
>> Just start nuking/moving/cleaning if you think it makes sense.
>
> Just did for 2.2.x. But are we going to relase 3.0.6 or 3.1.2? I don't think
> so because all energy is being put into 3.2.x. I
Am 2014-06-17 21:14, schrieb Jason van Zyl:
Just start nuking/moving/cleaning if you think it makes sense.
Just did for 2.2.x. But are we going to relase 3.0.6 or 3.1.2? I don't
think so because all energy is being put into 3.2.x. If so, should we
declare at least 3.0.x as EOL? If not, people
Am 2014-06-17 21:17, schrieb Karl Heinz Marbaise:
Hi,
> has anyone of you ever check the roadmap in JIRA lately?>
There are several versions which will probably never be released.
Moveover, all tickets for 2.2.2 are fixed.
Can we clean up upcoming versions?
Are we going to release a EOL 2.2.2
Hi,
> has anyone of you ever check the roadmap in JIRA lately?>
There are several versions which will probably never be released.
Moveover, all tickets for 2.2.2 are fixed.
Can we clean up upcoming versions?
Are we going to release a EOL 2.2.2?
In february we had decided not to release any 2.
Just start nuking/moving/cleaning if you think it makes sense.
On Jun 17, 2014, at 3:05 PM, Michael Osipov wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> has anyone of you ever check the roadmap in JIRA lately?
>
> There are several versions which will probably never be released. Moveover,
> all tickets for 2.2.2 ar
Hi folks,
has anyone of you ever check the roadmap in JIRA lately?
There are several versions which will probably never be released.
Moveover, all tickets for 2.2.2 are fixed.
Can we clean up upcoming versions?
Are we going to release a EOL 2.2.2?
Thanks,
Michael
--
12 matches
Mail list logo
