Perhaps instead of using a 1.x category, it might be more useful to tag issues 1.4.x or 1.5.x categories, and then "Future" for anything else.. So perhaps the 1.x issues that are not on the front-burner for 1.4.x should be marked Future, and the 1.x category retired.
There may not be current interest among today's committers in pursuing an issue, but there may still be interest among future committers. -Ted. On 2/19/07, Paul Benedict <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ted, I was hoping that it would be obvious that version 1.x or whatever is sooner than Future :-) So when I talk about Future being on the horizon, yes, the issues have been reviewed and the ticket is viable, but it's not slated for the near future. However, what about tickets that are reviewed but there's no current interest in addressing them? That's the main problem here. Because as long as the bug isn't invalid, we could suck all the issues into Future. However, that totally defeats the purpose of the road map if there are 400 issues being listed as "Future". I am looking for direction here: If it is is up to me, I am re-reviewing the 30-some Future tickets and re-assigning them back to Unknown if there's no good chance they are going to be addressed in this or the next major release. They've been siting around for a very long time. So I'd like to know what SHOULD be done? You know my preference. Paul
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
