Re: GNOME version

[Luis Villa <louie ximian com>]

On Fri, 2004-03-26 at 12:10 -0700, Elijah Newren wrote:
> On Fri, 2004-03-26 at 14:14 -0500, Luis Villa wrote:
> 
> > FYI: for those who haven't played yet, there is now a 'GNOME Version'
> > field to replace/enhance the old GNOMEVER keywords.
> > 
> > Question: should it have a 'not gnome' version, for things like GIMP?
> 
> Do you mean
>   1) There should be yet another field, in addition to version, gnome
>      version, and all the rest?
>   2) That one of the valid values for the 'Gnome Version' field should
>      be "Not part of core GNOME"?
>   OR
>   3) Something else?
> 
> Item (2) makes sense to me.  We already have "Unspecified" and
> "Unversioned enhancement" as values for that field.

Yeah, I meant (2). 'Unspecified' as it currently stand is ambigous- it
means either 'not in gnome' or 'no one has specified what version it is
in.' I'd like to clarify that ambiguity, I guess- I was trying to write
up the definition for the new bug_status.html and this came up.

Luis