> > Holger, > > despite this is a good news, I wonder whether it's really necessary to have > three tickets to track one feature. > > * https://sourceforge.net/p/ipmitool/feature-requests/32/ - created on > 2013-04-02 by myself > * https://sourceforge.net/p/ipmitool/patches/81/ - created on 2013-09-02 by > you > * https://sourceforge.net/p/ipmitool/patches/83/ - created on 2013-09-30 by > you > > I find this state a bit confusing. I understand it's probably impossible to > attach file to somebody's else ticket(I haven't tested new SF.net yet). > What I don't understand is why you have created a new ticket. Moreover, why > haven't you updated your original ticket instead of creating a new one. > [Liebig, Holger] Unfortunately, I cannot edit/delete/change the status of my own tickets - maybe because I'm not a direct member of ipmitool, so feel free to delete patch 81 and revise the status of your own ticket. I also think it is a good idea to distinguish between feature requests and actual patches (I had left a notice on your ticket referring to my first version of the patch).
Thanks, Holger ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ October Webinars: Code for Performance Free Intel webinars can help you accelerate application performance. Explore tips for MPI, OpenMP, advanced profiling, and more. Get the most from the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and register > http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=60134791&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ Ipmitool-devel mailing list Ipmitool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ipmitool-devel
