Re: [Chandler-dev] Re-architecture target in Bugzilla for Desktop bugs?

Well, I'd hate to loose the distinction between 1.0-Candidate bugs  
and Future bugs. But perhaps we can use Priority to draw that  
distinction.

Mimi

On Jul 11, 2008, at 6:22 AM, Grant Baillie wrote:

> Sure, sounds reasonable ... there's an existing "Chandler 2.0"  
> target for bugs like that (although I think the only bug assigned  
> to it is the master rearchitecture bug).
>
> --Grant
>
> On 10 Jul, 2008, at 13:41, Mimi Yin wrote:
>
>> I was asking Jeffrey about a performance bug in the 0.7future pile  
>> (which I am cleaning up) and I wondered aloud if it might not be a  
>> good idea to have an re-architecture target. In other words, start  
>> flagging bugs that should really be fixed on the new code base as  
>> opposed to current code base. I imagine the performance bugs would  
>> fall into this category. There are also a bunch of UI refresh  
>> issues that might apply as well.
>>
>> Going through such an exercise might help us get a grip on how to  
>> scope re-architecture work in the coming months.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>> Mimi
>> _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
>>
>> Open Source Applications Foundation "chandler-dev" mailing list
>> http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/chandler-dev
>
> _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
>
> Open Source Applications Foundation "chandler-dev" mailing list
> http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/chandler-dev

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Open Source Applications Foundation "chandler-dev" mailing list
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/chandler-dev