Existing application impact flag

[Kathey Marsden <km...@sbcglobal.net>]

Dan and I were discussing the existing application impact flag.  
Typically this is set for intentional behaviour changes and also for 
regresssions until they are fixed.  It was intended to provide an easy 
report for those upgrading to know what changes might affect their 
applications on upgrade.

Dan suggested that the "existing application impact"  field would be 
better split into two fields. One for intentional changes and another 
for bugs that might affect existing applications.  I kind of like it the 
way it is.  Does anyone have thoughts on this?

Kathey

Re: Existing application impact flag

[Daniel John Debrunner <dj...@apache.org>]

Kathey Marsden wrote:
> Dan and I were discussing the existing application impact flag.  
> Typically this is set for intentional behaviour changes and also for 
> regresssions until they are fixed.  It was intended to provide an easy 
> report for those upgrading to know what changes might affect their 
> applications on upgrade.
> 
> Dan suggested that the "existing application impact"  field would be 
> better split into two fields. One for intentional changes and another 
> for bugs that might affect existing applications.  I kind of like it the 
> way it is.  Does anyone have thoughts on this?

Or I thought it was already split into two flags:

    regression - a regression from a previous release
    existing application impact - an intentional change that might 
require application change


Dan.