Knut Anders Hatlen <[email protected]> writes: >> I agree we should close this issue, but is marking it "fixed" good? >> Maybe "duplicate" would be better? > > The reason why I chose "fixed" was that I thought of this issue as one > giant issue (the link type used for most of the issues is > incorporates/is-part-of) that was mostly fixed, and with separate issues > for all the remaining work. But please feel free to change it.
An alternative would be to delete those links that point to non-fixed issues. I was worried somebody seeing this issue closed might think all such differences had now been fixed; not a big deal, I added a caveat in the issue description. Dag
