Re: bug 620

Robert Sievers (bob@abisource.com)
Mon, 08 Nov 1999 08:48:20 -0600

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Leonard Rosenthol: "Re: wxWin vs. AbiSource framework"
Previous message: Jeff Hostetler: "Re: wxWin vs. AbiSource framework"
In reply to: Logan Hall: "bug 620"
Next in thread: Logan Hall: "Re: bug 620"

At 10:49 PM 11/7/99 -0700, Logan Hall wrote:
>i have been playing with the style commands on the latest cvs build and
>the problem i reported as bug 620 seems to have dissapeared. This
>should be marked as qa to verify fixed. I would do it but im not sure
>if that would be right and propper of me. also i dont know if i can
>even do that in bugzilla

Yes, you (or anyone) are encoouraged to move a bug to the "QA to Verify"
status if you think it should be closed. All I ask is that a brief note is
written when you do. Just do not take the next step and move the bug from
"QA to Verify" to "Closed", or else I won't have the chance to do
regression testing.

Robert Sievers
Open Source Evangelist

Next message: Leonard Rosenthol: "Re: wxWin vs. AbiSource framework"
Previous message: Jeff Hostetler: "Re: wxWin vs. AbiSource framework"
In reply to: Logan Hall: "bug 620"
Next in thread: Logan Hall: "Re: bug 620"

This archive was generated by hypermail 1.03b2.