[IronPython] IronPython Issue Workflow

Richard Nienaber rjnienaber at gmail.com
Mon Feb 7 14:14:52 CET 2011

I've been using my own testcase template to reproduce C#/.NET interop
scenarios. It may be a good idea to include a similar thing in the docs to
try and standardize the testcase code that devs receive.


On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 9:03 AM, Jeff Hardy <jdhardy at gmail.com> wrote:

> I want to make sure I'm on the same page as everyone else when it
> comes to issue workflow. What I've been doing is:
> * For old bugs that aren't reproducible, just close it.
> * For old bugs that are reproducible, add test case and set "Release" to
> 2.7.
> * When fixing bugs, mark as "Fixed", make sure the release is set to
> the next release, and include the changeset hash in a comment.
> * On a release, close all "Fixed" bugs.
> All new bugs/CPython incompitibilities should have their "Release" set
> to 2.7 once they're confirmed; features should set to "3k" or
> "Future". I doubt all of those will get fixed for 2.7 and still have
> 2.7 be released this year.
> I'm not sure what to do about bugs targeting 2.6.2; I would wager they
> could be re-targeted to 2.7.
> Any other suggestions on policy for the issue tracker? I want to get
> this written up before the weekend so that there are docs to point any
> new people at.
> - Jeff
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> Users at lists.ironpython.com
> http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/ironpython-users/attachments/20110207/d286508f/attachment.html>

More information about the Ironpython-users mailing list