No problem Jacopo :)
The proposal otherwise looks good. We would perhaps need "Release Branch
09.04", even though the code will not be committed to this release branch but
still one can post bug (if any) and/or attach patch for the fixes etc.
Regards
Vikas
On Apr 17, 2012, at 5:55 PM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:
> ah ah, you are right Vikas!
> Please disregard the proposal about 09.04.03... I probably need another coffee
>
> Jacopo
>
> On Apr 17, 2012, at 12:40 PM, Vikas Mayur wrote:
>
>> Jacopo,
>>
>> Since 09.04.02 was the last release of the series 09.04, does the proposed
>> new version 09.04.03 has any purpose?
>>
>> Regards
>> Vikas
>>
>> On Apr 17, 2012, at 3:55 PM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:
>>
>>> I would like to perform the following maintenance
>>>
>>> 1) "archive" the following versions (they will disappears from drop down
>>> when tasks are created):
>>> Release 09.04
>>> Release 09.04.01
>>> Release 10.04
>>> because they are all for superseded releases; if there are open issues
>>> assigned ("affects") to them we could bulk move them to versions "Release
>>> Branch 09.04" and "Release Branch 10.04"
>>>
>>> 2) create new versions (for upcoming releases):
>>> Release 09.04.03
>>> Release 10.04.03
>>> however new bugs should always be reported ("affect") against the "Release
>>> Branch 09.04", "Release Branch 10.04" and "Release Branch 11.04" ; we could
>>> use the "Release 09.04.03" and "Release 10.04.03" when the task is fixed in
>>> the branch as the "fixed in" version.
>>>
>>> I think that #1 is rather important; I am not sure about #2.
>>>
>>> What do you think?
>>>
>>> Kind regards,
>>>
>>> Jacopo
>>>
>>> PS: I have also created "Release 11.04.01" with a tentative release date of
>>> May 15: I am going to use this version to log a series of tasks that are
>>> required before the release; after the release I will "archive" this
>>> version as the versions in #2 above.
>>>
>>
>
