Hmmm...  This would look like:

( [closed] duplicate of #3911 )

( [closed] forwarded to Celeste maintainer )

( [closed] rejected - see notes )

Yeah, that seems to make sense.

-----Original Message-----
From:	Daniel Vainsencher [mailto:danielv at netvision.net.il]
Sent:	Thu 6/5/2003 8:34 AM
To:	The general-purpose Squeak developers list
Cc:	
Subject:	Re: [ANN] BugFixArchiveViewer 1.1 on SqueakMap
Yes that makes a lot of sense. 

But how about just a [closed] tag, with the description specifying
whether it was rejected, forwarded, a repeated fix... seems to me
there're a lot of scenarios, and little difference in the handling.

Daniel

Marcus Denker <marcus at ira.uka.de> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 05, 2003 at 02:05:49PM +0200, Daniel Vainsencher wrote:
> > Were'nt you the guy that wanted to remove tags to simplify a couple of
> > weeks ago? ;-)
> > 
> Yes, but this was without having a tool (With the comment-notepad 
> there is no need to remember all those tags...).  ;-)
> 
> The idea with [forwarded] and [closed] would be that the archiveviewer
> would filter those away, so you'd only see those messages that need
> additional work.
> 
>         Marcus
> 
> -- 
> Marcus Denker marcus at ira.uka.de  -- Squeak! http://squeak.de




-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/ms-tnef
Size: 3175 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20030605/12586240/attachment.bin