Hello Stephen, On Friday 13 March 2009 13:55, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > Thorkil Naur writes: > > > > status: wont-fix -> resolved > > urk. > > > In the GHC bugtracker, there is a status "invalid" for this sort of > > thing, > > In the XEmacs tracker I've separated *status* (here "resolved" == > closed) from *reason* (here "wont-fix" and "invalid"; other values > being "superseded", "fixed", "not a bug" == "invalid", and "not our > bug"). > > For that matter, I've also separated *severity* (the user's > perception, and only partially ordered, with values "inelegant", > "inconvenient", "some work obstructed", "much work obstructed", > "security", "data loss", "hang", and "crash") from *priority* (the > developer's estimate of when he'll get to it, with values "critical" > == show-stopper, "urgent", "normal", and "cosmetic"). > > Unfortunately the tracker is inaccessible until Monday or so due to > our DNS admin's failure to follow instructions on a host move :-( but > when it comes back up you can find it at http://tracker.xemacs.org/. > There's a detailed user guide, the first half of which is basically > about XEmacs workflow and how the issue properties etc interact (down > at the bottom of the sidebar). >
Thank you for taking an interest in this. I will certainly have your ideas in mind and also take a look at the XEmacs tracker before considering any changes to the darcs bug tracker. Best regards Thorkil _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
