On Wed, 2008-07-02 at 10:51 +0200, Adrian Lienhard wrote: > Cool, thanks. > > On Jul 2, 2008, at 10:43 , Norbert Hartl wrote: > > > I have created issues for all of the fixes mentioned on > > > > http://code.google.com/p/pharo/wiki/ThreeDotTenFixes > > > > After that I scanned the numbering (I chose the summary to include > > the number at beginning for sorting) and closed to gaps. The gaps > > have type comment and appear on the open issues list. I didn't take > > the time to scan mantis for the mantis number which includes the > > fix. We can arrange that. > > > > All issues have "Type-Squeak" being source of a squeak version fix > > and "Fixed" as a status. My proposal is that everyone takes tickets > > produces slices from it and changes the status to verified after > > uploading. > > Unless the fix is trivial , I would still follow the normal process > and first set the state to Fixed and then have somebody else verify > the change. > Yes, i thought about this. But then this issues are already fixes and the person that incorporates them is not the author of the fix. Therefor it is already a fix and the reviewing/slicing is a verification. But I understand what you mean. Shall I set all stati to new? That would have the opportunity that they appear in the open issues list.
Norbert _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
