On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 12:58:44AM -0700, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
> 2008/4/22 Vitaliy Margolen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > Well that will affect closed bugs - which is not good. However I don't have
> > a strong objection here - whatever works. It would be even better if we can
> > add the version
Hello Vitaily,
2008/4/22 Vitaliy Margolen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
> > Hello Scott,
> >
> > 2008/4/22 Scott Ritchie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >> Vitaliy Margolen wrote:
> >> > 3. After the next release, if the bug is still present, modify version
> to
> >> > that rel
Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
> Hello Scott,
>
> 2008/4/22 Scott Ritchie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> Vitaliy Margolen wrote:
>> > 3. After the next release, if the bug is still present, modify version to
>> > that release. Of course no modifying of old bugs.
>> >
>>
>> Sounds like a simple addition to
Hello Scott,
2008/4/22 Scott Ritchie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Vitaliy Margolen wrote:
> > 3. After the next release, if the bug is still present, modify version to
> > that release. Of course no modifying of old bugs.
> >
>
> Sounds like a simple addition to Alexandre's (scripted?) closing of al
Vitaliy Margolen wrote:
> 3. After the next release, if the bug is still present, modify version to
> that release. Of course no modifying of old bugs.
>
Sounds like a simple addition to Alexandre's (scripted?) closing of all
fixed bugs on release day.
Thanks,
Scott Ritchie
I'm copying my response here to continue the conversation.
Please don't remove cvs/git version.
What should be done is:
1. Leave old bugs alone or modify them case-by-case
2. All bugs with "cvs/git" version from now on can be filed on the
development branch between releases only.
3. After the ne
