BUGREPORTED work item state
james.westby at canonical.com
Wed Oct 12 21:12:35 UTC 2011
On Tue, 4 Oct 2011 18:55:24 +0200, Alexander Sack <asac at linaro.org> wrote:
> Do we really need this kind detail encoded in the the state of a WI itself?
> Alternatively, we could always add a comment to the white board to document
> what happened
> with POSTPONED work items.
I agree with Alexander here, I think we can do without this state.
Would anyone object to me changing those workitems with that state to
More information about the linaro-dev