From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12561 invoked by alias); 1 Jun 2003 10:58:14 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 12229 invoked from network); 1 Jun 2003 10:58:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at) (128.131.111.2) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 1 Jun 2003 10:58:00 -0000 Received: from [128.131.111.60] (acrux [128.131.111.60]) by vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41B0F13791; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 12:57:59 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2003 10:58:00 -0000 From: Gerald Pfeifer To: Wolfgang Bangerth Cc: Daniel Berlin , Giovanni Bajo , gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: RESOLVED states in bugzilla In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-SW-Source: 2003-06/txt/msg00021.txt.bz2 On Sat, 31 May 2003, Wolfgang Bangerth wrote: >> Did we ever come to consesus on whether we wanted VERIFIED and CLOSED? > I think if nobody comes forward with a good plan > - how to make use of them > - AND HOW IS GOING TO DO THE WORK (please no obscure cron jobs) > in the next few days, go ahead and get rid of VERIFIED. I'm willing to > take the heat of this is the wrong decision. Be my guest to send part of the flames in my direction. ;-) I fully agree with your proposal. KISS. Gerald -- Gerald "Jerry" pfeifer@dbai.tuwien.ac.at http://www.pfeifer.com/gerald/