Hin-Tak Leung wrote: > --- On Sun, 28/9/08, Jeremy White <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > <snipped> > > The con is actually less trouble than you think - if somebody reports > a bug against CVS/GIT, it would be reasonable to assume that the > report date is within a day or two compared to the git > clone/rebase-origin date. Other use of GIT (the kernel) report-date is > not very indicative of the state of the tree, but since only one > person has commit-rights in wine, the report-date is a good indicator > of a specific few commits. > There is a problem with using CVS/GIT and that is we are ASSUMING that the version used is only a couple of days old, it could be as much as a week old. I prefer reports against valid and released versions as problems found with a commit may be fixed with another corrective commit (this has happened several times in the last year.)
+1 to NO CVS/GIT and NO CVS/GIT reporting in Bugzilla, unless we are going to do build numbers based upon the day of build. James McKenzie > > > > >
