On 22.06.2010 16:52, Philipp Lohmann wrote:
Hi,
On 6/22/10 2:49 PM, Bernd Eilers wrote:
Mathias Bauer wrote:
That's exactly what Stephan said: bureaucratic humbug.
Well I know we do have some members in an
On 23.06.2010 00:13, Mathias Bauer wrote:
On 22.06.2010 14:49, Bernd Eilers wrote:
Mathias Bauer wrote:
Hi,
Hi,
the right solution would be to remove the check. A target milestone
is a hint when a particular should be fixed or is planned to be fixed.
The same is true for a CWS. If a
Hi,
the right solution would be to remove the check. A target milestone is
a hint when a particular should be fixed or is planned to be fixed. The
same is true for a CWS. If a developers decided to fix an issue earlier
or finish a CWS earlier, why should that be marked as failed? That's
Hi,
On 6/22/10 2:49 PM, Bernd Eilers wrote:
Mathias Bauer wrote:
That's exactly what Stephan said: bureaucratic humbug.
Well I know we do have some members in an
implement_as_you_want_when_you_want_and_dont_care_about_qa-needs_roadmaps_or_documentation
camp but I didn´t really expect you
For a CWS based on DEV300 with release set to OOo 3.4 and all associated
tasks having target OOo 3.4, AllowedRelease and AllowedTaskTargets
erroneously are both set to failed (e.g., see
http://eis.services.openoffice.org/EIS2/cws.ShowCWS?Id=9434OpenOnly=falseSection=All).
-Stephan
