I recently reopened an issue [1] because I found an old schematic that could be opened
properly by 5.1, but which gave "missing symbol" boxes when opened with 6.0 and
6.99.
However, while the effect is the same, the root cause may be different, so
maybe reopening the bug was the wrong approach
You commented in that bug report with the details. Usually, commenting in
open reports with examples that show the issue is sufficient.
If the issue were already closed, then opening a new report and referencing
the old one is preferred.
Seth
On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 10:48 AM Steven A. Falco
wr
Thanks - next time I'll open a new report and ref the old one. But I won't
bother for this one, since Wayne has already commented about it on gitlab.
Steve
On 5/27/22 01:53 PM, Seth Hillbrand wrote:
You commented in that bug report with the details. Usually, commenting in open
repor
3 matches
Mail list logo
