Can we mark updates as such, after the fact? (Was:RE: [ENH][KCP]
KCP-0007-pullUpIsMeta-ab-sd ([closed] -- allreadyincluded))
Brent Vukmer
bvukmer at blackboard.com
Sun Jun 8 14:08:47 UTC 2003
Doug --
Is it OK if we mark these [ENH][KCP]|[MCP] posts that have already been converted to updates, as such? If so...
Marcus --
It is so cool that you are rockin' like a hurricane in the archives! I would love it if you marked posts like these with updatestream-number information.
Either "[closed] -- included as update #123456" or "[update - 123456]", depending on what Doug thinks is the best way to mark it.
Thanks guys,
Brent
-----Original Message-----
From: marcus at ira.uka.de [mailto:marcus at ira.uka.de]
Sent: Sun 6/8/2003 6:23 AM
To: squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org
Cc:
Subject: [ENH][KCP] KCP-0007-pullUpIsMeta-ab-sd ([closed] -- allreadyincluded)
This changeset has been included: [closed]
< Brought to you by the BugFixArchiveViewer and CommentNotePad >
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/ms-tnef
Size: 3185 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20030608/79da5f24/attachment.bin
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|