On 15 April 2015 at 21:19, Paul Benedict <pbened...@apache.org> wrote: > Odd way to use versions, imo. Sounds like "discussion" and "review patch" > and "patch needed" tags would be the better tool.
I completely agree. But this has how it's been done historically in Lang, so I wasn't trying to rock the boat too much with this suggestion. But if others agree, I'd be happy to make a more substantial change that involves moving to Jira labels too. Duncan > > > Cheers, > Paul > > On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 3:18 PM, Duncan Jones <djo...@apache.org> wrote: > >> Hi folks, >> >> Currently the "Review Patch" fix version seems to be applied whenever >> code has been supplied in an issue. This includes situations where >> agreement hasn't yet been reached on fixing the issue and where the >> supplied "patch" is minimal at best. >> >> I would prefer if we only use this marker on issues where the >> discussions have already been completed and we've decided we want to >> go ahead with the alteration/addition. >> >> Do others agree with this? If so, I'll edit existing issues to match >> this. I then plan to try and clean up some of the "Discussion" items, >> so that we either close them or move them to "Review Patch" or "Patch >> Needed". >> >> Duncan >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
