Hi Markus
Could you send out a pointer to the bugs you filed and perhaps also a
separate list of those that you feel are spec violations?
Thanks
Shreedhar
Markus Karg wrote:
>
> Thanks for this information. Actually in some places somebody lowered
> the priority with the justification that it will be automatically
> rised again after GF2.1. Seems that automatic rise doesn't happen, so
> I'd like to ask not to write info like that into the tracker. People
> like me think it actually will happen.
>
>
>
> So now I'll check all my 98 issues once more and rise those worth of
> fixing (isn't it ironic? I mean, I do not spend ANY work into filing
> an issue if I am not convinced that actually it IS worth fixing)...
>
>
>
> Regards
>
> Markus
>
>
>
> *From:* Jerome.Dochez_at_Sun.COM [mailto:Jerome.Dochez_at_Sun.COM]
> *Sent:* Freitag, 24. April 2009 18:31
> *To:* dev_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
> *Subject:* Re: When will "old" issues get fixed?
>
>
>
> Hi Markus
>
>
>
> I can see that most of your bugs are filed at P4, although I cannot
> guarantee we will fix all 98 of them, I think you should raise the
> priority (P3) of the ones that are particularly important to you so
> the developers get notified and look at them. In theory all P1 to P3s
> are fixed for FCS so if you can convince the developer that some of
> these bugs are worthy P3 then it will have to be fixed.
>
>
>
> jerome
>
>
>
> On Apr 24, 2009, at 2:42 AM, Markus Karg wrote:
>
>
>
> I understand that the road map for GFv3 ist very tight, but on the
> other hand I'd like to ask whether "old" issues (reported in GFv2)
> will ever get fixed? The reason is that I reported 98 issues of which
> not a single issue got fixed so far. Some of them are violations of
> the Java EE 5 specification. So I wonder whether this ever will get
> fixed? Any plans?
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Markus
>
>
>