On Sun, Apr 17, 2005 at 11:07:21PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Sun, Apr 17, 2005 at 12:22:06AM -1000, Warren Togami wrote: > > NEEDINFO on everything sounds like a good plan. Give the bug submitters > > a chance to say "this is still an issue in devel (FC4)" and move the bug > > there. After a while in NEEDINFO just close it due to lack of activity. > > That is more than fair. > > Thanks for the feedback, Warren, and much thanks to Dave Jones, who has > dealt with all of his kernel bugs, leaving exactly 700 fc2 bugs in open > states. Anyone else have any input? I would like to proceed with this plan > this week. The plan seems great to me, thanks for dealing with this. About the wording: If it is not a security issue and hasn't been resolved in the current FC4 test release, reopen and change the version to match. this seems to imply that we don't have a responsibility to fix FC3 bugs, which I don't agree with! I'd prefer it were reworded to say something like: "...hasn't been resolved in the current FC3 updates or the FC4 test release, ..." Regards, joe
