On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 10:30 AM, Rick McGuire <object.r...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 12:26 PM, Mark Miesfeld <miesf...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> There is absolutely no point in keeping bugs open when there is no >> intention of fixing them. In this case there is no intention to fix >> that code. So, I'm fine with closing them as "won't fix" also. > > I think I'd prefer that they do be left open. These are certainly > problems that only exist in the current code, but they are also things > that we'd want to ensure get fixed whenever a new implementation is > tackled. Leaving them open creates an easily checked todo list of > items that need addressing. I agree with that. I was thinking that they could be checked by looking them up in the closed list. But, of course that is not as easy as finding them is today in the open list. > Maybe we should create a new group for > that work effort and assign them to that group. That way they are > still easily retrievable, but can be moved out of the open state as > well. That seems like a good solution to me. At least one that I'd be happy with. <grin> I'm mostly just trying to get the current list whittled down so that it is easier for some one to look at the list and find a bug they think they could fix or a bug they are interested in fixing. I'll look into creating a new group in a day or two. -- Mark Miesfeld ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.net email is sponsored by Make an app they can't live without Enter the BlackBerry Developer Challenge http://p.sf.net/sfu/RIM-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Oorexx-devel mailing list Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel
