Okay, that's done. MNG-4223 is the new issue if you're interested.
Benjamin Bentmann wrote:
John Casey wrote:
So, would you say it'd be better to reopen 3057 and assign it to 3.x,
or open a new issue that references 3057 and 4167, and assign that to
3.x?
That's actually the question that I couldn't answer for myself and the
only other opinion so far was an "Agreed" by Brett on an "or" clause...
Hm, IMHO your second suggestion seems most clean, i.e. open a new issue
that links to the other two, probably adding a short comment to 3057
saying that this was intentionally reverted for 2.2.0 (i.e. is not an
unexpected regression) and is scheduled for final resolution by the new
issue in 3.x.
Apologies for not paying attention to the page title. :-)
Na, no need for apologies, otherwise I would have to apologize as well
for being such a pedant ;-)
Benjamin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
