On Sunday, February 8, 2004, at 01:51 PM, Ken Ray wrote:
I don't think you're viewing the bugs correctly. Take a look at the email from Mark Chia called "Bug Database Changes Completed" - the "Target Version" popup is to be used for the version that a bug *was resolved in*, not the one where the bug *will be resolved*.
I read Mark's mail as saying the "Tqrget Version" as being set by the assignee, in particular, when the bug is fixed. The meaning of "target" is key in that case. At an internal interim release, the bug is set as CLOSED. I am assuming that the meaning of "target" is dropped when a CLOSED bug is associated with a release that has actually been released, that is, at that point the meaning is some particular release not a future one or a hoped-for one that the word "target" might imply.
That is, the meaning of "target version' depends on 1) whether the status is RESOLVED/FIXED or CLOSED/FIXED and 2) (I think) whether the specified version has been released.
Even so, there does seem to be a backlog of work to get the database up to where it should be. In particular there are a large number of fixed bugs with a target of "---". I feel confident that these will be resolved and eventually bugzilla will be in sync.
Some time ago my father-in-law ran across some bug in Netscape. I checked on the mozilla fixes to get a clue and found that there were two people fixing bugs each putting back the bug the other fixed in order to fix his own. That is unlikely on the RunRev team, but I think the workflow closing step would minimize the impact of such a conflict.
Dar Scott
_______________________________________________ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
