Brett C. wrote:
> Facundo Batista wrote:
>
>>On 5/30/05, Fred L. Drake, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>While we can't (and shouldn't) delete categories, we can change the text used
>>>to describe them. So "Python 2.2.2" can become "Python 2.2.2
>>>(unmaintained)". Whether this is des
Facundo Batista wrote:
> On 5/30/05, Fred L. Drake, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>>While we can't (and shouldn't) delete categories, we can change the text used
>>to describe them. So "Python 2.2.2" can become "Python 2.2.2
>>(unmaintained)". Whether this is desirable or not, I'm not sure
On Monday 30 May 2005 22:46, Josiah Carlson wrote:
> Pain in the rear, but it is a solution to the 'problem' of having 2.1
> and 2.2 groups.
The issue is really that it's not clear that this is a real problem.
Unfortunate, yes, but that's it. Ideally, there'd be a way to say that
certain cat
On 5/30/05, Fred L. Drake, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> While we can't (and shouldn't) delete categories, we can change the text used
> to describe them. So "Python 2.2.2" can become "Python 2.2.2
> (unmaintained)". Whether this is desirable or not, I'm not sure.
+1 for this solution.
We (
"Fred L. Drake, Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Monday 30 May 2005 17:06, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
> > There's no harm in having these surface. If the category is accurate,
> > let's use it. If the bug is out of date, we can mark it as such and
> > close it.
>
> While we can't (and s
On Monday 30 May 2005 17:06, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
> There's no harm in having these surface. If the category is accurate,
> let's use it. If the bug is out of date, we can mark it as such and
> close it.
While we can't (and shouldn't) delete categories, we can change the text used
to des
> As the process of deprecating old bugs evolves, the following
> categories got empty:
>
> Python 2.1.1
> Python 2.1.2
> Python 2.2.1
> Python 2.2.1 candidate
> Python 2.2.2
That's great news.
> The SF interface doesn't allow to delete old categories, but maybe we
> could
