Jeroen Demeyer <jdeme...@cage.ugent.be> wrote:
> On 2011-05-13 07:24, Tom Boothby wrote:
>> Bottom line: I think this was handled wrong. If a ticket's been
>> merged, unless it's found to have a genuine flaw, it should supersede
>> (IMO) tickets with positive reviews which have not been merged.
> In this case, the *author* of those tickets decided to change the
> already-merged #10804 as opposed to the not-yet-merged #10549. I think
> listening to the author (Robert Miller) was the right thing to do here.
I disagree with your logic-- you can't justify A with B if B happened
after A... You backed #10804 out before I did anything. Since both
were rejected, I randomly chose one to rebase on the other.
> Also, since sage-4.7.1.alpha0 has not been released, the "merged" is a
> "weak merged" which can still change.
Of course anything can change before the final release comes out. I've
had to back things out in release alpha{n} which were merged in
alpha{n-1} before. Tom's point is just that it is inconvenient as a
reviewer. Probably better to close a ticket only once you decide it's
going in, whenever possible.
--
Robert L. Miller
http://www.rlmiller.org/
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URL: http://www.sagemath.org
