[development] Confusion by too many issue queues

Darrel O'Pry dopry at thing.net
Tue Nov 14 17:33:04 UTC 2006

On Tue, 2006-11-14 at 06:11 -0800, Derek Wright wrote:
> On Nov 14, 2006, at 3:23 AM, Gerhard Killesreiter wrote:
> > IMO it doesn't make sense to have a 6-dev queue /and/ a x.y.z queue  
> > _on_ _top_ of a 5-dev queue and a 5.1-beta queue.
> i totally agree.  it's a work-in-progress, and help is on the way...
> > I suggest to remove 5-dev and 6-dev and to replace x.y.z by  
> > "Development version".
> sorry, but with all due respect, this means you don't fully  
> appreciate the motivation for and implications of my push to get core  
> to use 2 digit version numbers and for how the new release system  
> works. ;)  in particular, you should (re)read the "Motivation"  
> section at the top of:
> http://drupal.org/node/85943 -- New version number convention for core
> - "HEAD", "cvs", "Development version", etc is a *moving target*.   
> issues filed against something like this are useless, since in 6  
> months "HEAD" is different and the issue isn't necessarily still valid.

Doesn't change the fact that an issue filed against 'HEAD' will probably
remain in HEAD as HEAD moves forward until closed. Creating a release
doesn't make the bugs in head disappear. Releasing a major version
doesn't make the bugs in head go away.

Do we have a system for keeping the moving target/head  issues attached
to head. I understand and appreciate having dev versions for each
release, I'm frustrated that I'm too busy to get to use them at the

More information about the development mailing list