In that case, bugs #10007 and #10008 should also be marked as RESOLVED/WONTFIX.
/ Tomas ----- Original Message ----- From: "Craig R. McClanahan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Struts Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2002 10:04 AM Subject: Re: Bugzilla "protocol" question > > > On Thu, 11 Jul 2002, Tomas Viberg wrote: > > > Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 09:25:44 +0200 > > From: Tomas Viberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Reply-To: Struts Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: Struts Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: Re: Bugzilla "protocol" question > > > > 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? > > > > If the final conclusion is, in fact, "WONTFIX", then resolving it with > that setting is an appropriate action. Otherwise, this bug report would > likely stay open forever. > > I've been leaving bugs reported against 1.0.x open for the moment > (although I am trying to verify that 1.1 doesn't suffer from the same > issue), because we haven't formally decided one way or the other about > doing a 1.0.3 bugfix release. If we ever decided to do a 1.0.3, it would > be appropriate to go ahead and fix these in the 1.0 branch -- but it > doesn't seem likely to me (at this point) that we will choose such a > course of action, given that 1.1 is already pretty solid and is receiving > all the current attention from the developers. > > > / Tomas > > > > Craig > > > > ----- 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]> > > > > > > > -- > 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]>
