From: Vladimir Prus (ghost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-11-08 11:09:24
Rene Rivera wrote:
>> You're suggesting having all open tickets in "To be determined," and
>> only assinging milestones after they're closed? That doesn't seem
>> like a very good use of the technology.
> Perhaps. But this is sounding to me as just a semantic disagreement. You
> want to define the 1.35.0 milestone as the "prospective set of issues
> that may be part of the 1.35.0 release". And I prefer to define it as
> "the set of issues that are part of the 1.35.0 release". I don't
> actually care which definition one picks, and if the first one is a
> better use of milestones then the latter is fine. Just make sure to
> describe the milestone (in trac) to make it clear that it's a
> prospective determination. But I would still like to have some
> representation of what issues are address that are already part of the
> release branch. So maybe we need a new milestone just for that?
Why 1.35.0 milestone cannot be just list of issues that must be fixed
for 1.35.0? Therefore, an issue can be marked closed only when it's
fixed on trunk, and the fix is merged to branch. Am I missing something?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk