On Fri, 30 Apr 2010 07:17:02 +1000, Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com> wrote: > R. David Murray wrote: > > On Thu, 29 Apr 2010 14:11:57 -0400, Terry Reedy <tjre...@udel.edu> wrote: > >> On 4/27/2010 5:14 PM, "Martin v. Loewis" wrote: > >>> You only have resolutions on closed issues, > >> Only for 'closed' or also for 'pending' and 'languishing'? > >> If pending were implemented to mean 'auto close in x days', then > >> Resolution would need to be set when Status is set to 'pending'. > > > > Definitely. Resolution should always be set for Pending, IMO. > > Note that I'll occasionally use "pending" to mean "committed to at least > one branch, still need to port/block remaining branches". (e.g. I did it > this week, since 2.7b2 was higher priority than the other branches which > don't have near term binary releases coming up). > > I've seen others use it that way as well.
Yes, I have noticed that several people do this. This will stop working if we implement autoclose. Other people just leave the issue open and change the targeted versions instead. -- R. David Murray www.bitdance.com _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
