-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Thomas Schulz writes:
I would like to suggest that having a Target Milestone of Future for a
bug is harmful. It was probably necessary when you were trying to get
3.0.0 out and you were not sure what the next verson number would be,
but now it seems to be a way for a bug to fall into a black hole. It
seems that if a bug is not grabbed by someone within a few hours of
being submitted, it is lost.
It's a manageability thing. We don't have someone who can sit
there continually reprioritising bugs :(
I suggest that if you have bugs with TM set to Future, and you think
they're implementable sooner ;) -- feel free to post a comment and pipe
up. In particular, getting a patch that implements the feature is a *lot*
more likely to get a bug a solid milestone.
- --j.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Exmh CVS
iD8DBQFB4sycMJF5cimLx9ARAkTQAJ9rgwfZb2/vfyt9fjkNc5McdUdRCwCgifvP
0o8X6l0A6wBmqck+mU2Hh/E=
=b1up
-END PGP SIGNATURE-