r.cn should explain all the acronyms it uses as each is encountered.
--- Headers Follow ---
From jidanni@jidanni.org Wed Nov 24 00:45:46 2004
Return-Path: <jidanni@jidanni.org>
Delivered-To: grass-bugs@lists.intevation.de
Received: from mail.intevation.de (aktaia [212.95.126.10])
by lists.intevation.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id BCABB102BEC
for <grass-bugs@lists.intevation.de>; Wed, 24 Nov 2004 00:45:46 +0100 (CET)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by mail.intevation.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E88C36DE4
for <grass-bugs@lists.intevation.de>; Wed, 24 Nov 2004 00:45:46 +0100 (CET)
Received: from frodo.hserus.net (frodo.hserus.net [204.74.68.40])
by mail.intevation.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id B876636CD8
for <grass-bugs@intevation.de>; Wed, 24 Nov 2004 00:45:45 +0100 (CET)
Received: from tc218-187-75-172.2-3.dynamic.apol.com.tw ([218.187.75.172]:35864 helo=jidanni1)
by frodo.hserus.net with esmtpsa
(Cipher TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.43 #0)
id 1CWkLt-0005FW-Rm by authid <jidanni> with plain
for <grass-bugs@intevation.de>; Wed, 24 Nov 2004 05:15:44 +0530
To: grass-bugs@intevation.de
Subject: r.cn explain acronyms
From: Dan Jacobson <jidanni@jidanni.org>
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 07:15:32 +0800
Message-ID: <878y8sma23.fsf@jidanni.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.9 tagged_above=-999.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00
X-Spam-Level:
-------------------------------------------- Managed by Request Tracker
Very good idea. I tried to clean up the buglist, but as it is now it's
confusing and difficult. In fact, I would suggest:
* 5.0 -> remove all (discontinued, unsupported)
* 5.4 -> split bugs / wishes
* 5.7 -> split bugs / wishes
It wouls be good if those who submitted bugs could check whether they still
hold true.
pc
At 04:55, mercoledì 01 dicembre 2004, Hamish has probably written:
right now we have bug targets:
bug
wish
grass5.7
can we have one specifically for grass 5.0/5.3? It would help to
separate out the old v.digit bugs, set priorities etc.
On Wed, Dec 01, 2004 at 07:24:45AM +0100, Paolo Cavallini wrote:
Very good idea. I tried to clean up the buglist, but as it is now it's
confusing and difficult. In fact, I would suggest:
* 5.0 -> remove all (discontinued, unsupported)
It is better to document the bugs or ask people to try the next version 5.4.0.
After a grace period (say one month) closing can be done without
their reaction.
I have submitted quite a few bugs to Free Software projects
and it is frustrating when your bugs are just closed without proper
explanation.
* 5.4 -> split bugs / wishes
* 5.7 -> split bugs / wishes
It wouls be good if those who submitted bugs could check whether they still
hold true.
If you think people should do that, ping them over the tracker
and say that the bug will be closed in one month if there is no
reaction.
> Very good idea. I tried to clean up the buglist, but as it is now
> it's confusing and difficult. In fact, I would suggest:
> * 5.0 -> remove all (discontinued, unsupported)
It is better to document the bugs or ask people to try the next
version 5.4.0. After a grace period (say one month) closing can be
done without their reaction.
Can we resolve <=5.0 with a "won't fix" tag?
(most open 5.0 bugs will hold for 5.4, so be careful with this..)
I have submitted quite a few bugs to Free Software projects
and it is frustrating when your bugs are just closed without proper
explanation.
On Thu, Dec 02, 2004 at 12:45:30PM +1300, Hamish wrote:
> > Very good idea. I tried to clean up the buglist, but as it is now
> > it's confusing and difficult. In fact, I would suggest:
> > * 5.0 -> remove all (discontinued, unsupported)
>
> It is better to document the bugs or ask people to try the next
> version 5.4.0. After a grace period (say one month) closing can be
> done without their reaction.
Can we resolve <=5.0 with a "won't fix" tag?
I would advise agaist it.
"Won't fix tags" are a red flag for me when it happens to me.
(most open 5.0 bugs will hold for 5.4, so be careful with this..)
Yes, so a fix should be: Fixed in 5.4.x.
So maybe it should be avoided to have 5.0 specific bugs if possible.