note to myself: remember to send emails also to the mailing list ...
Am Wednesday 08 July 2009 20:50:19 schrieben Sie:
> 2009/7/8 Matthias Pfafferodt <matthias.pfaffer...@mapfa.de>:
> >> Patch-for-bug vs. patch-for-new feature might seem clear to those
involved for a time, so it'd probably would give similar results to
simply set up tags/keywords that can be assigned by the maintainers
> >> sort the two types for later searches. (Assuming that, like on
> >> it's possible to create/assign arbitrary tags.)
> > You are right. At the moment there is one lonely patch waiting in the
patches section. I don't know if anybody found the new nation.
> First you were for using both trackers, but then you agreed on some
> points of John's mail. Could you clarify which way you would vote at the
Sorry if it was not clear. I'm for the use of two different tracker (bugs /
patches). But I see John's point that it will create confusion.
At my first look on the new bug tracker at gna I also found it strange to
find 'bugs' as well as 'patches' and interpreted it as said in my first
> I would like to see the split bugs <> patches into two trackers, there
bugs includes crashes / errors (+ the patches to correct them) and
> contains new features to freeciv. This way it would also be easier to
check if a bug was reported before.
After nothing was posted in the section 'patches' I started to use 'bug'
for this. A clear text stating that should be reported into which tracker
on top of the corresponding pages would be helpful.
> Until we have agreed on something, I continue using current practice
> of posting bug reports, bugfixes and feature patches all to the same
> - ML
Matthias Pfafferodt - http://www.mapfa.de
Matthias.Pfafferodt <at> mapfa.de
Freeciv-dev mailing list