On 8/6/07, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Robert Burrell Donkin ha scritto:
<snip> > > i will dub trunk JAMES 3.0 and update next-major in JIRA to 3.0 > > > > - robert > > Some issue have as "fix version" both next-major and trunk: in my > original idea an issue was in next-major if it was targeted to that > release otherwise it was in trunk. Now that you will rename next-major > to 3.0 what's the plan on how to use the fix versions? i don't really have a plan :-) > Should issues better be assigned to "3.0 AND Trunk" versions or "3.0 OR > Trunk versions"? opinions? > Trunk was something like the "unscheduled" but more likely to be > accepted sooner or later in the codebase. > > Will you create a "3.0M1" version or a "3.0" or both? I'm used to use > JIRA as a scheduling tool, too, but I'm not sure I understood how others > developers intended the usage of JIRA. i was planning on just changing next-major -> 3.0 for now maybe a 3.0M1 version would be useful nearer the time. opinions? - robert --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
