But even if it probably won't get fixed, it doesn't feel right to mark it as resolved. After all, it isn't resolved in the Struts 1.0 branch (where it is reported). Or am I wrong?
/ Tomas ----- Original Message ----- From: "Craig R. McClanahan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Struts Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2002 9:16 AM Subject: Re: Bugzilla "protocol" question > > > On Wed, 10 Jul 2002, Joe Germuska wrote: > > > Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2002 23:34:23 -0500 > > From: Joe Germuska <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Reply-To: Struts Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Bugzilla "protocol" question > > > > Hi: > > > > Are there any understandings about who marks Bugzilla bugs as > > "resolved"? Earlier tonight, I marked #10006 as "Resolved/Wontfix" > > because it refers to BeanUtils as a Struts component, and it is now a > > commons component. > > > > Is this kind of resolution something which is meant to be done only by > > committers? I don't want to step on anyone's toes or anything; I'm just > > trying to help knock out bugs en route to another beta release. > > > > The pages I found in bugzilla only seem to talk about posting bugs, not > > closing them. Maybe I didn't look hard enough? > > > > Please advise, > > Joe > > > > http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10006 > > > > General protocol I am used to is that it's either done by a committer or > by the originator, unless it's clearly not a bug -- which probably isn't > really true on the bug report in question. However, your conclusion that > it probably won't get fixed (in 1.0.x) is probably accurate in the end. > > Craig > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
