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 |
> |