On 04/16/2016 04:19 PM, Guillaume Munch wrote: > Le 16/04/2016 20:49, Richard Heck a écrit : >> >> As Scott pointed out, my previous suggestions for how fixes committed to >> the staging branches should be handled in trac was silly. We can't reuse >> "fixedinmaster" for 2.3-staging. I'm also not sure that we want to >> introduce a new status "fixedinstaging" for such a short time. >> >> Here, then, is a simple proposal: Any bug that is fixed in one of the >> staging branches should get the *keyword* "fixedinstaging", and the >> milestone should be set to reflect the appropriate branch. So fixes >> committed to 2.3-staging should be tagged "fixedinstaging", with the >> milestone set to 2.3.0. Fixes committed to 2.2.2-staging should be >> tagged "fixedinstaging", with the milestone set to 2.2.2. Etc. This will >> restore the /status quo ante/ briefly, which was workable if not >> perfect. The only difference is that the keyword will not distinguish >> what has happened where, but we can tell this from the milestone and >> comments in the bug itself. There won't be so many of these that that >> becomes a problem. >> > > The fixedinstaging keyword is fine, however the milestones were > already used to mean where I want to commit the patch next (i.e. > 2.2.x). We cannot use that field to denote where it has been committed > already (i.e. 2.3). (The comments in the ticket make that clear.)
Yes, I realize that I'm suggesting we repurpose the milestone for these commits. Again, there will be few enough of them that I don't think it will present a problem in practice. Questions about which branch it will go to next will be resolved quicky enough. Richard
