On Sat, Feb 06, 2010 at 01:12:07PM +0000, Neil Puttock wrote: > On 6 February 2010 09:19, Dmytro O. Redchuk <[email protected]> wrote: > > > So, "just for tracking": since both issues marked as "Enhancement", i > > believe it's quite safe to leave 999 unverified until 305 be closed. > > I might be wrong, but I think you're supposed to mark duplicates as > verified if you agree they're duplicates.
Correct. And the verified should, if at all possible, but somebody *other* than the person who marked it "fixed". In the case of the build-system stuff, I'll probably have to play both roles, but that's definitely an exception to the rule. > Now I've looked at this issue in a bit more detail, I think I was a > bit hasty in marking it as a duplicate. I'll change it back and > explain why on the tracker. Ok, thanks! Then the system is working exactly as planned. :) Cheers, - Graham _______________________________________________ bug-lilypond mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
