Brett C. wrote:
Facundo Batista wrote:
On 5/30/05, Fred L. Drake, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
While we can't (and shouldn't) delete categories, we can change the text used
to describe them. So Python 2.2.2 can become Python 2.2.2
(unmaintained). Whether this is desirable or not, I'm not
As the process of deprecating old bugs evolves, the following
categories got empty:
Python 2.1.1
Python 2.1.2
Python 2.2.1
Python 2.2.1 candidate
Python 2.2.2
That's great news.
The SF interface doesn't allow to delete old categories, but maybe we
could ask SF
On Monday 30 May 2005 17:06, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
There's no harm in having these surface. If the category is accurate,
let's use it. If the bug is out of date, we can mark it as such and
close it.
While we can't (and shouldn't) delete categories, we can change the text used
to
Fred L. Drake, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Monday 30 May 2005 17:06, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
There's no harm in having these surface. If the category is accurate,
let's use it. If the bug is out of date, we can mark it as such and
close it.
While we can't (and shouldn't)
On 5/30/05, Fred L. Drake, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
While we can't (and shouldn't) delete categories, we can change the text used
to describe them. So Python 2.2.2 can become Python 2.2.2
(unmaintained). Whether this is desirable or not, I'm not sure.
+1 for this solution.
We (aka this
On Monday 30 May 2005 22:46, Josiah Carlson wrote:
Pain in the rear, but it is a solution to the 'problem' of having 2.1
and 2.2 groups.
The issue is really that it's not clear that this is a real problem.
Unfortunate, yes, but that's it. Ideally, there'd be a way to say that
certain
Facundo Batista wrote:
On 5/30/05, Fred L. Drake, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
While we can't (and shouldn't) delete categories, we can change the text used
to describe them. So Python 2.2.2 can become Python 2.2.2
(unmaintained). Whether this is desirable or not, I'm not sure.
+1 for
