No objection.
On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 7:22 AM, Gabriel Reid <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 04 Nov 2012, at 17:25, Matthias Friedrich <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > On Sunday, 2012-11-04, Gabriel Reid wrote: > >> On 04 Nov 2012, at 10:35, Matthias Friedrich <[email protected]> wrote: > > [...] > >> I noticed that CRUNCH-104 (upgrade slf4j) is included in the release > >> notes -- is that what we want? Nothing actually happened for this > >> ticket, and it was marked as invalid. > > > > Not sure what's the best thing here. At work we set the fix version to > > the release for which it was considered (for whatever reason, probably > > tradition). You can clear the field if you like, I don't mind either > > way. > > My preference is to remove it, as it feels to me that having it in there > just confuses things (especially for an auto-generated list of issues that > have been "resolved" in a release). > > Does anyone else have any objection to me clearing the version (and > thereby removing CRUNCH-104 from the release notes)? > > - Gabriel > >
