I believe that this is sufficient. Thanks.
If this is acceptable to others, we should then note this in 114 and
318, and close them both.
geir
Weldon Washburn wrote:
Sorry. Its all my fault. I was distracted by the JIRA user interface
and entered a new bug report (318) when I should have updated my old
bug report (114). All my updates are posted to 318.
Would it help if I closed 114? Or put a note that follow-on is
actually posted to 318?
On 5/2/06, Tim Ellison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
>
>
> Tim Ellison wrote:
>
>>
>> I'm confused, we voted on HARMONY-114 and committed HARMONY-318? If
>> nothing else that is not very traceable.
>>
>> Does the BCC that applies to HARMONY-114 also apply to -318?
>
> Excellent catch. (Many eyes...) Also, the JIRA status were not changed
> either.
>
> I guess there's a question here - can we consider HARMONY-318 a
> derivative work of -114? If so, I'm satisfied wrt process docs...
That's for Weldon to say of course. If he can make that assurance then
I would consider the difference between 318 and 114 as simply work
conduced as part of the project.
Regards,
Tim
--
Tim Ellison ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
IBM Java technology centre, UK.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Weldon Washburn
Intel Middleware Products Division
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]