[Scons-dev] Duplicate issue policy

[William Blevins]

+1 for doing it based on Issue context.


On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 6:52 AM, Russel Winder <russel at winder.org.uk> wrote:

> On Sun, 2014-08-10 at 12:15 +0200, Dirk Bächle wrote:
> > On 10.08.2014 11:02, Russel Winder wrote:
> > > I am wondering if it should be policy for later duplicates to be marked
> > > as duplicates of earlier issues, rather than earlier issues being
> marked
> > > as duplicates of later ones?
> > >
> > I've seen earlier duplicates that had the better information, or
> > additional patches/testcases attached. In those cases, I always chose to
> > mark the "later" issue as duplicate of the first...I'd really like to
> > continue making this decision based on information, not on modification
> > dates.
>
> OK works for me.  Whatever works for the people actually doing things
> rather than pontificating on them :-)
>
> --
> Russel.
>
> =============================================================================
> Dr Russel Winder      t: +44 20 7585 2200   voip:
> sip:russel.winder at ekiga.net
> 41 Buckmaster Road    m: +44 7770 465 077   xmpp: russel at winder.org.uk
> London SW11 1EN, UK   w: www.russel.org.uk  skype: russel_winder
>
> _______________________________________________
> Scons-dev mailing list
> Scons-dev at scons.org
> http://two.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://two.pairlist.net/pipermail/scons-dev/attachments/20140810/8003e87d/attachment.html>