On Wed, 2009-03-18 at 10:17 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Tue, 2009-03-17 at 13:16 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote: > > On Tue, 2009-03-17 at 15:46 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > > > > > > Right, exactly. I think what would be ideal is to have a similar page > > > defining the status values for Fedora usage, and then nag the bugzilla > > > guys to make the Status help link point to one or the other depending on > > > which product (RHEL/Fedora) you were looking at a bug for ... > > > > Or we cam get over ourselves and figure out a way to use the same > > definitions both within RHEL and within Fedora. > > Sure, that would work too. However, it does involve either convincing > RHEL to change their process, or getting all Fedora maintainers to use > the 'ERRATA', 'CURRENTRELEASE' and 'NEXTRELEASE' resolutions properly. > I'm ready and willing to don my asbestos underpants and give that a > shot, though, if we agree it's the best course. :) Personally I don't see a better way around it, given the huge overlap of Fedora and RHEL contributors. -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature! identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- fedora-test-list mailing list fedora-test-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list
