Re: [FOSSology] Scheduler Status page

2009-07-14 Thread Laser, Mary 

 -Original Message-
 From: fossology-boun...@fossology.org 
 [mailto:fossology-boun...@fossology.org] On Behalf Of Gobeille, Robert
 Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2009 12:24 PM
 To: Donohoe, Mark
 Cc: fossology@fossology.org
 Subject: Re: [FOSSology] Scheduler Status page
 
 So you are proposing that we add notes about all outstanding 
 bugs targeted for 1.1 to the release notes?
 Sounds reasonable to me.  There aren't very many.  I think it 
 would be good to get these down to a one liner + url to the bug.
 
 Bob
 
 
 On Jul 14, 2009, at 12:16 PM, Donohoe, Mark wrote:
 
 
 
  Bob, so what should we put in the release notes?  It seems 
 like we are
  going to ship with it in the current state, so it would be good to
  document in the release notes what the issues are (I'm not sure what
  they are)
 
  Mary?  Thoughts on this.
 
 

Mark  Bob,

Yes, there are a handful of open bugs that will not get fixed for 1.1.  (At 
least 3 I know of, are license identification issues that should be addressed 
in 1.2.)  As Bob suggests, we should add these to the Known Issues section of 
the release notes  http://fossology.org/release_notes#known_issues.

Mary
___
fossology mailing list
fossology@fossology.org
http://fossology.org/mailman/listinfo/fossology

Re: [FOSSology] Scheduler Status page

2009-07-14 Thread Bob Gobeille 


On Jul 14, 2009, at 12:46 PM, Laser, Mary wrote:

Yes, there are a handful of open bugs that will not get fixed for  
1.1.  (At least 3 I know of, are license identification issues that  
should be addressed in 1.2.)  As Bob suggests, we should add these  
to the Known Issues section of the release notes  http://fossology.org/release_notes#known_issues 
.


Is someone volunteering to do this?

Bob

___
fossology mailing list
fossology@fossology.org
http://fossology.org/mailman/listinfo/fossology

Re: [FOSSology] Scheduler Status page

2009-07-14 Thread Laser, Mary 
 

 -Original Message-
 
 
 On Jul 14, 2009, at 12:46 PM, Laser, Mary wrote:
 
  Yes, there are a handful of open bugs that will not get 
 fixed for 1.1.  
  (At least 3 I know of, are license identification issues 
 that should 
  be addressed in 1.2.)  As Bob suggests, we should add these to the 
  Known Issues section of the release notes  
  http://fossology.org/release_notes#known_issues
  .
 
 Is someone volunteering to do this?
 

I suggest each bug owner document their bugs in the known issues section.

Mary
___
fossology mailing list
fossology@fossology.org
http://fossology.org/mailman/listinfo/fossology