[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Subsumed Request items - was Project scope was Re: Thoughts on Voiding Invoices
- Subject: Subsumed Request items - was Project scope was Re: Thoughts on Voiding Invoices
- From: David Tangye <..hidden..>
- Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2006 12:16:28 +1000
On Mon, 2006-09-25 at 17:45 -0700, Chris Travers wrote:
> > c) As per a) & b) ? Can SF mark items as 'Deferred and link them to
> > other items?
> We could flag them as deferred, but not link them to other items.
Can SF allow items, that are subsumed by (ie a part of) another request
item that covers the first, to be marked not as deferred, but as 'refers
to' or similar? Deferred is different: Its hopefully a discrete request
that is simply put off.
> Well, not everything that is changed is tracked on Sourceforge. There
> are cases where patches come in over the email list which are applied,
> security issues are brought up in private, and other circumstances
> where tracking on sourceforge bypassed.
True, they could be added to the bottom of the generated list. That
would be very useful.
> The current approach is to add changes to the Changelog. I would
> think that it ought to be possible to generate the changelog from SVN
> This being said, "What's New" does need some extra maintenance. Some
> new features require some additional explenation that need to be
> documented in the release notes (i.e. why is this a big deal...)
I think all this should make development reporting streamlined, simple,
easy to do, remove duplication of info and effort, and help ensure the
info is accurate and easy for users to relate to any specific requests
they are interested in following.