On Mon, 2004-04-05 at 22:28, David Neary wrote:
> Up until earlier today there were over 30 versions of the GIMP to
> choose from in Bugzilla. This has been reduced to 4 - 1.0.x, 1.2.x,
> 1.3.x, 2.0.0 and Current CVS. I question whether we'll need
> 2.0.1, 2.0.2, etc at all, and personally I'm happy having just
> ".x" for the major branches, but anyway...
I think we should stick to having 2.0.1, 2.0.2 etc. It's often important
to know if the user reporting a bug is using a particular release in
which the bug is supposed to have been fixed.
> So - I just wanted to say a big thank you to Luis Villa for doing
> this today with his magic SQL fingers.
I second that. Thanks Luis - and thank you Dave for taking the
initiative to clean this up.
> We also talked about the problem of dead/completed milestones -
> it doesn't make sense to have any bugs on 1.2.x milestones or
> 1.3.x milestones any more (or, indeed, 2.0.0). But it doesn't
> make sense to delete them either.
> Unfortunately, Bugzilla doesn't (yet) have the concept of a completed
> milestone, allowing milestones to be hidden from the list for people
> doing triage. We can, however, sort these so that the active
> milestones are at the top of the list. Does this sound like a good
I think we should stick to a numerically sorted list as I find this more
intuitive. When using non-numerically (or non-alphabetically for that
matter) sorted list I often find myself looking for an entry in the
Henrik Brix Andersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Gimp-developer mailing list