Thorkil Naur <[email protected]> writes:
>> status: wont-fix -> resolved
>
> Now, I don't really care, but it seems useful to be consistent about the
> status usage. I also considered changing to resolved, but my thinking was
> that, since the issue is really pointing at a potential problem in the
> manual, changing the status to resolved would seem to imply that we had
> actually changed the manual accordingly, somehow.
Maybe if the "resolved" status were renamed to "done", people would be
less likely to misapply[0] it?
[0] per the semantics described on the wiki. (Sorry, I'm too lazy to
find the precise page.)
_______________________________________________
darcs-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
