From: Guillaume Melquiond (guillaume.melquiond_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-11-08 11:48:59
Le jeudi 08 novembre 2007 à 10:36 -0600, Rene Rivera a écrit :
> > I have not followed the discussion closely, so I am probably missing
> > something, but why a new milestone? Unless I'm mistaken, issues that are
> > "fixed", "closed", and with a "1.35" milestone, are precisely issues
> > that will be fixed in the release (unless the relevant patches are
> > reverted). So I don't understand the need for a new milestone.
> For exactly the "unless the relevant patches are reverted" situation.
But your new milestone would not fix this issue either. If the milestone
is set and if the patch is then reverted, whether the milestone is
"1.35" or "really1.35" will not matter. It will be inaccurate in both
cases. If someone takes care of removing the "really1.35" milestone when
a patch is reverted, one could also take care of removing the "1.35"
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk