> For the record, I agree with this, and I also think we should have a > standard way to say which bugs are critical enough that they should > be fixed before 2.0. I would propose that we create a standard > query (which we can link to from the wiki) that lists the set of open > bugs remaining.. > > I would propose that we say that 'release=SVN' and either 'priority>3' > or 'severity>[something]' (i'm not sure exactly how to categorize this.. > But having a link from the wiki to bugzilla to display the set of open > bugs would be IMHO a Good Thing (TM).
With trac we'd get all that for free... -- Benoit Grégoire, http://benoitg.coeus.ca/
pgpHFkEcBwv1f.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
