more on trac
quozl at laptop.org
Wed Dec 2 20:47:38 EST 2009
On Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 12:21:55PM +1100, James Cameron wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 12:27:41PM +0100, Martin Langhoff wrote:
> > On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 11:23 AM, James Cameron <quozl at laptop.org> wrote:
> > > On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 09:38:20AM +0100, Martin Langhoff wrote:
> > >> 2 - bugs on released versions -- filed by volunteer testers _and by
> > >> our end users_
> > >>
> > >> We can't close the door on #2. Please do add the old releases back to
> > >> the versions to report bugs against.
> > >
> > > No, sorry. ?The old releases were not present in full, only some of them
> > > were, and there are far too many for this to be a realistic option.
> > Hmmm. The list you added below does not correlate much with releases.
> > I agree with removing things that are not formal releases, but 8.2
> > (756?) and 8.2.1 (802) _must_ be there. Otherwise it is impossible to
> > do maintenance of stable releases.
> Okay, you've convinced me from the point of view of maintenance, which I
> didn't think was happening ... I will (or will approve) adding back the
> build numbers for 8.2 and 8.2.1 as release names in the trac version
This has been completed.
> > > I've added back a 1.0 Software version.
> > We never had a "1.0 Software". We've had things like Update.1, .2
> > (756?) and 8.2.1 (802).
> I'll remove it at the same time as the major build numbers are
> I'd like to know which build numbers are actually being used in
> deployments, community testing, or maintenance.
Thanks to John for the list.
More information about the Devel