[development] death to "x.y.z" version is now inevitable

[AjK]

> > to re-iterate -- if you're dealing with an "x.y.z" issue, you
> > should re-assign it to:
> > 6.x-dev -- feature request
> > 5.x-dev -- bug report/task for 5.x

These seem odd to me too (I've read the docs and still puzzled). Isn't
6.x-dev the HEAD of TRUNK? If it isn't, where's it gone, what's called? Not
6.x-dev surely?

5.x-dev seems reasonable, it's the HEAD of the 5 branch, yes?

> > 4.7.x-dev bugs/tasks for 4.7.5 and beyond (now exists, for the

And 4.7-dev?  We doing devel work on 4.7? I would have thought bug and
security fixes are only going into the 4.7 branch.

I would have thought 4.7-stable would be a better name for the head of the
4.7 branch. Then when the d,o release engineers (killes, et al?) drop tags
onto this when doing a release (e.g. DRUPAL-4-7-4) at appropriate times
(such as a security fix or many bug fixes / important fixes).

With regards to filing bug reports. If someone wants to say report a bug in
4-7-2 (and the latest release is 4-7-4) isn't the response "have you updated
to 4-7-4 to see if the bug is still there?". Basically, as it stands at the
moment, to do this you (we in fact, developers) have to look in 4-7-4
ourselves and then say "doh, this was fixed at 4-7-3, please upgrade". That
just makes more work for us the developers as we have to look to see if an
old bug is fixed or not when end users can do this themselves by upgrading
(that's what upgrading is often about). That's probably one of the reasons
why we have 1000s of old issues hanging around the bug queue. Most of these
can probably be wiped (or put into a status of swept under the carpet as
it's almost impossible to go over them this late in the day, given many will
probably have been fixed). As it stands now, the "duplicate" status only
gets done when a developer sees a dup, otherwise the issue gets left behind
in the bug queue.

Think that's my 2p worth

--Andy (AjK)

p.s. We did discuss archiving old issues, say before 4.6 release to dampen
down the bug queue on IRC recently. Many seemed in favour so long as it was
a controlled "tidy up". That conversation never reached the mailing list so
I'm bringing it up here. If you want answer this point on the list, please
change the email subject appropriately to start a new thread.