Robert Burrell Donkin ha scritto: > i count > > +1 robert burrell donkin > +1 Stefano Bagnara > +1 Bernd Fondermann > +1 Serge Knystautas > +1 norman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > +1 Søren Hilmer > +1 Vincenzo Gianferrari Pini > +1 Danny Angus > > (all binding) > > please jump in with corrections if i've miscounted otherwise, this VOTE passes > > i will dub trunk JAMES 3.0 and update next-major in JIRA to 3.0 > > - robert
Some issue have as "fix version" both next-major and trunk: in my original idea an issue was in next-major if it was targeted to that release otherwise it was in trunk. Now that you will rename next-major to 3.0 what's the plan on how to use the fix versions? Should issues better be assigned to "3.0 AND Trunk" versions or "3.0 OR Trunk versions"? Trunk was something like the "unscheduled" but more likely to be accepted sooner or later in the codebase. Will you create a "3.0M1" version or a "3.0" or both? I'm used to use JIRA as a scheduling tool, too, but I'm not sure I understood how others developers intended the usage of JIRA. Stefano --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
