On Thu, 2 Aug 2007 19:16:16 -0400 "Joshua Slive" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 8/2/07, Nick Kew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > As for 2.x bugs, there are quite a few which are going to be > > harder to deal with. Perhaps we want a new "Archived" status, > > for PRs which have merit but which aren't going to get 'fixed'. > > Particularly those with PatchAvailable. > > I would just use "Later". I don't think that really works where there are no clear 'owners' of different components. I'm thinking of "Archived" as a kind-of repository for patches that would be inappropriate for the standard distribution (e.g. they break RFC) but are exactly right for some users with particular needs. Not an ideal solution, but perhaps a least-bad option in a world where round tuits for maintaining anything more elaborate are in perpetually short supply. The other option is to designate module owners, who will then take primary responsibility for all bugzilla entries affecting their modules. That doesn't have to mean fixing them, but it would mean taking the decision on things like WONTFIX/LATER/??? -- Nick Kew Application Development with Apache - the Apache Modules Book http://www.apachetutor.org/
