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 to > >> sort the two types for later searches. (Assuming that, like on bugzilla, > >> 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 moment.
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 mail: > I would like to see the split bugs <> patches into two trackers, there bugs includes crashes / errors (+ the patches to correct them) and patches > 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. Matthias > Until we have agreed on something, I continue using current practice > of posting bug reports, bugfixes and feature patches all to the same tracker. > - ML -- Matthias Pfafferodt - http://www.mapfa.de Matthias.Pfafferodt <at> mapfa.de _______________________________________________ Freeciv-dev mailing list Freeciv-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/freeciv-dev
