jralls at ceridwen.us
Tue Sep 3 20:33:50 EDT 2013
On Sep 2, 2013, at 1:39 PM, Geert Janssens <janssens-geert at telenet.be> wrote:
> On Monday 02 September 2013 19:48:48 Christian Stimming wrote:
>> John Ralls <jralls at ceridwen.us> schrieb:
>>> BZ has an enormous number of old target versions which makes for very
>>> long lists when picking. I just modified all of the already-released
>>> versions to sort to the bottom, but would anything bad happen if I
>>> just deleted all previous releases? None of them are in use.
>> In use by currently open bugs, you mean? Unfortunately bugzilla won't
>> allow to delete old versions if there are closed bugs on them. I
>> think that's why this list grows larger and larger...
>>> Similarly I'd like to clean out the "version" list as well to include
>>> only those versions which have bugs on them (which includes every
>>> release from 2.2.0 on. I propose to consolidate all of the 2.0 and
>>> 2.3 releases into 2.0.x and 2.3.x respectively.
>>> Any objections or concerns?
>> All consolidation that is possible technically is fine with me.
Still feel that way after a few *thousand* bug-mails?
It's done for now: I left 2.2.9 as a separate version because we do
occasionally get reports against it. All of the old milestones have
been deleted as well, and I corrected 2.5.4 to 2.5.5, which is the
next release, and added 2.5.6. I also moved all of the open bugs in
2.5.x to 2.6.0 and deleted 2.5.x as a milestone--we'll never do a
More information about the gnucash-devel