| 1 |
2010/4/3 Gilles Dartiguelongue <eva@g.o>: |
| 2 |
> Le samedi 03 avril 2010 à 12:50 +0300, Petteri Räty a écrit : |
| 3 |
>> I don't think later is valid resolution. If there's a valid bug it just |
| 4 |
>> means it's never looked at again. If the bug is not valid then a |
| 5 |
>> different resolution should be used. So what do you think about |
| 6 |
>> disabling later? |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> You are trying to remove a valid status for a case that has been badly |
| 9 |
> managed ??? Speaking for gnome herd, afaik, all bugs marked LATER are |
| 10 |
> for the simple reason they will be done later and no other status would |
| 11 |
> be fine expect REJECTED maybe, but we don't want to say that to the face |
| 12 |
> of the reported like this do we ? |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
Thats why I think a bugzilla LATER keyword is just as effective; but |
| 15 |
people doing bugzie searches would no longer exclude these types of |
| 16 |
bugs on accident. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
-A |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> -- |
| 22 |
> Gilles Dartiguelongue <eva@g.o> |
| 23 |
> Gentoo |
| 24 |
> |
Archives