janssens-geert at telenet.be
Wed Sep 4 08:59:52 EDT 2013
On Tuesday 03 September 2013 17:33:50 John Ralls wrote:
> On Sep 2, 2013, at 1:39 PM, Geert Janssens <janssens-geert at telenet.be>
> > 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.
> > +1
> Still feel that way after a few *thousand* bug-mails?
I only got about 250 :)
> 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
> 2.5.x release.
Thanks for the housekeeping.
More information about the gnucash-devel