[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: issue classification: priority guidelines
|
From: |
Valentin Villenave |
|
Subject: |
Re: issue classification: priority guidelines |
|
Date: |
Wed, 15 Dec 2010 15:56:57 +0100 |
2010/12/15 Graham Percival <address@hidden>:
> In the mean time, go ahead and twiddle the definitions of
> priorities (as long as you leave Critical alone). But be aware
> that you're "rearranging deck chairs on the titanic".
ROTFL -- my point exactly :-)
Cheers,
V.
- issue classification: priority guidelines, Janek Warchoł, 2010/12/15
- Re: issue classification: priority guidelines, Dmytro O. Redchuk, 2010/12/15
- Re: issue classification: priority guidelines, Phil Holmes, 2010/12/15
- Re: issue classification: priority guidelines, Graham Percival, 2010/12/15
- Re: issue classification: priority guidelines, Janek Warchoł, 2010/12/15
- Re: issue classification: priority guidelines, Phil Holmes, 2010/12/15
- Re: issue classification: priority guidelines, Janek Warchoł, 2010/12/16
- Re: issue classification: priority guidelines, Carl Sorensen, 2010/12/16
- Re: issue classification: priority guidelines, Graham Percival, 2010/12/15
- Re: issue classification: priority guidelines, James, 2010/12/15
- Re: issue classification: priority guidelines, Carl Sorensen, 2010/12/15
- Re: issue classification: priority guidelines, Graham Percival, 2010/12/15
Re: issue classification: priority guidelines, Valentin Villenave, 2010/12/15