Re: return of the living dead^W^W gnome milestone!

On Tue, 04 Jan 2005 19:23:19 -0500, Luis Villa <louie novell com> wrote:


> It's not been used that way recently, from looking at:
> This is not really anyone's fault, it isn't like bugsquad has been
> screaming appropriately about 2.8, and it is easy to get confused given
> the # of fields. That said, now I'm going to crack down so we can get
> this right for GNOME 2.10.

Actually, it probably is someone's fault--mine.  I was encouraging
people to put bugs on that milestone, and just pointed out that the
release team (and senior bugsquad) could take them off if they didn't
consider it valid.  (See
 I can't seem to find any other mails, though I think I sent out a
similar one or two).  My reasoning was that I didn't want things to
fall through the cracks.  However, this method required that there be
people to review and find bugs that didn't belong on the list.  There
were two problems with that--one, I tended to use it incorrectly
(Andrew had to correct me a number of times), and two, a lot of us in
the bugsquad went inactive for fairly significant portions of the 2.8
cycle, and a lot of that happened at about the same time.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]