[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Tool version in HACKING
From: |
Rob Browning |
Subject: |
Re: Tool version in HACKING |
Date: |
Wed, 10 Apr 2002 10:07:42 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.090006 (Oort Gnus v0.06) Emacs/21.2 (i386-debian-linux-gnu) |
Thien-Thi Nguyen <address@hidden> writes:
> btw, in fixing this bug we come to the process question of: how do bugs
> fit into the TODO list? one obvious answer is "don't use TODO list, bug
> fixing (for those deemed needing it) is best managed separately". this
> is a not wholistic view however; bug fixing takes time which directly
> affects what can be done on TODO. fundamentally, bug fixing is a (we
> hope) non-repetitive action, something to do when the time is right.
> (and if the particular fix is congruent w/ long term design, the fix
> could be called one-shot.)
>
> so i think it would be useful to consider ways to include bugs in the
> TODO list. what does everyone think about this protocol:
I'm not sure I follow. I can see why we might want to have references
to bugs from the TODO list; are you arguing for more than that? (I
don't think I adequately grokked your suggestion).
Thanks
--
Rob Browning
rlb @defaultvalue.org, @linuxdevel.com, and @debian.org
Previously @cs.utexas.edu
GPG=1C58 8B2C FB5E 3F64 EA5C 64AE 78FE E5FE F0CB A0AD