Aaron Andersen wrote: > So in the case of 5693, the mozilla1.0+ keyword means that it really > should be in 1.0, but the nsbeta1- keyword means that the > @netscape.com people don't have time to fix it, and the target > milstone of mozilla1.2beta is when it will probably end up being fixed > if no one volunteers to do it now. Is that correct?
According to the activity log, bug 5693 was never nominated for mozilla1.0, but apparently Asa thought it should be fixed for mozilla1.0, since he added the mozilla1.0+ keyword without commenting. The bug obviously has a very long history, nearly 3 years now, and is complex and risky enough (Gerv even commented in it that 0.9.9 was too late to land a fix) that I won't attempt to summarize it, certainly not here. Dave Hyatt has worked on it a fair bit over the years, but attempts to introduce 'correct' behavior have yielded horrible performance degradations. I marked it nsbeta1- because my triage team thinks it does not need to be fixed for the next Netscape release. I set the target to 1.2 because I'm using that milestone as a 'parking log' for bugs that won't be fixed in the current development cycle, but whiich I don't want to lose in the sea of futured bugs. Peter
