root <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> >> Status: fix proposed => closed > >> >> > >> >> Strictly speaking, Axiom does not run on Windows > >> >> so this isn't a bug but a feature request. > >> > > >> >Tim, I guess with Axiom you mean your project. If this is indeed the > >> >case, > >> >please do not close bugs, just because they are fixed (in one sense or the > >> >other) in this project - rather make the status "fix-proposed". I would > >> >like to have IssueTracker used as a common database of bugs. > >> > >> Clearly when the bug says Axiom it applies to the Axiom project. > > > >This is your definition. From a legal standpoint you may be right. But I > >must > >say that it complicates thing enormously if I have to replace "axiom" with > >"axiom, open-axiom, fricas" in every bug report. > > It appears that this already exists because you can "close" a bug in > Axiom or Fricas, right?
I did not close a single bug, except it was fixed in all three projects. > The meta-name isn't Axiom and I will continue to act upon anything that > says its an "Axiom" bug because it applies to the Axiom project. Just > like Waldek will act upon anything that says its a "Fricas" bug because > it applies to the Fricas project. You are being very cooperative. > The fact that the Axiom project forked does not mean that the name > is suddenly generic. If, in the future, Fricas forks four times are > they all called Fricas? Of course not. I'd call them all axiom. Martin _______________________________________________ Axiom-developer mailing list Axiom-developer@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/axiom-developer
