https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=39773
--- Comment #14 from Nemo_bis <federicol...@tiscali.it> 2012-10-13 06:49:09 UTC --- (In reply to comment #13) > Note: taking issues off the blocker list don't diminish their priority. It > just means we're not going to hold a particular version deployment hostage > over > it. The difference is subtle: given the nature of LQT, this means that any and all bugs affecting it will rot forever and get worse at each update. Also, no need for hostages: is it really impossible to revert changes which are known to break stuff and deploy them only *after* they've been fixed? <rant>From a user perspective it's really impossible to understand what the purpose of continuous integration is, if nothing can stop known bugs from getting deployed. Erik asked people to file major bugs against LQT a year ago http://article.gmane.org/gmane.science.linguistics.wikipedia.technical/56008 , but it's obviously useless; I do it only for masochism and tracking-addiction.</rant> -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug. You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Wikibugs-l mailing list Wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l
