Rainer Bielefeld, 14-01-2007 08:49:
Caio Tiago Oliveira schrieb:
[...]
From my point of view, it's not applicable for requests of new
enhancements or features.
Because ... ?
My purpose is, after confirming they still required, either:
use current as the version
or:
change it to 2.0.
Why 2.0? We have 2.1 in between.
2.0 would represent the major version, we wouldn't had to change it for
2.1 or 2.2.
That's all only useless SPAM that won't bring any improvement for the
developing process. If the enhancement request is no longer required
(because we have the feature in the latest OOo), the issue can be
closed. If the requested feature still is required, that is visible
because the issue is unCLOSED. I don't remember any request from
developers for a modification of the current proceeding.
Neither do I, but the less issues they have to look at the better.
Changing the version to 2.0 would be a way to confirm it still required
in 2.x series. It would raise the same ammount of spam than commenting
on the issues and it's easier to search.
Older than 2.0 issues would mean they weren't revised.
Since makes more sense the "version" for an enhancement or feature
means the version to which it's applicable, than a specific version
(always major versions, by the way, never 2.1.1 or so on).
RFEs always are applicable for the current OOo version (we will not
develop additional features for OOo 1.0.1)
Except we already have this feature or something to replace it (Base for
some Calc requests, for instance).
Currently no reason has been listed what improvement a systematic
upgrade of the VERSION should achieve, and without any such argument I
disagree with the proposed proceeding.
OK...
If well fonded reasons for VERSION-upgrade can be found and a new
consensus will be reached, we can amend
>http://www.openoffice.org/bugs/bug_writing_guidelines.html>.
+1
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
