[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
RE: [cdt-dev] CDT 3.0 Closing
|
My opinion is that we triage and drop items and keep the
dates. It will be unfortunate, but that
is life. Of course I'll have to let the QNX'ers who
own the PRs to comment on them.
Thomas
I guess this leads to the question
of which defects do you think QNX can fix after RC3 but before RC4?
At IBM we were assuming that ALL the defects would be addressed by RC3,
and we were only doing Doc work after this.
To me "addressed" means, to evaluate the defect, and
fix it if needed, otherwise move it to a future release. At this late
stage of the release we should know exactly which of the existing defects will
be fixed before the final release.
- Dave
Alain Magloire
<alain@xxxxxxx> Sent
by: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
07/21/2005 11:59 AM
Please respond
to "CDT General developers
list." |
|
To
| "CDT General
developers list." <cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
|
cc
|
|
Subject
| RE: [cdt-dev] CDT 3.0
Closing |
|
> -----Original Message-----
<snip>
> The reason I
ask is that we have a large number of bugs still open on
> 3.0, the vast
majority owned by the gang at QNX. I just want to make
> sure we're all
on the same page.
>
Yes, we've been so tied up; things have a
surprising way of coming together
at the wrong moment. How about to
see after RC3 if an RC4 is needed? 8-)
Note: July/August release cycles
are no-nos, recipe for
trouble.
_______________________________________________
cdt-dev mailing
list
cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev