You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to issues@flex.apache.org by "Cyrill Zadra (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2013/08/29 06:03:01 UTC
[jira] [Updated] (FLEX-33488) FlexUnit
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLEX-33488?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]
Cyrill Zadra updated FLEX-33488:
--------------------------------
Fix Version/s: FlexUnit Next
> FlexUnit
> --------
>
> Key: FLEX-33488
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLEX-33488
> Project: Apache Flex
> Issue Type: Task
> Reporter: Cyrill Zadra
> Assignee: Cyrill Zadra
> Fix For: FlexUnit Next
>
>
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
Re: [jira] [Updated] (FLEX-33488) FlexUnit
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com>.
updated it.
On 8/28/13 10:16 PM, "Cyrill Zadra" <cy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>I don't mind changing it to "FlexUnit 4.2". I just don't have the rights
>in
>JIRA so if somebody with privileges can update version label.
>
>Cyrill
>
>
>On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 12:57 PM, Justin Mclean
><ju...@classsoftware.com>wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> > You mean for instance "FlexUnit 4.2" instead of "FlexUnit Next"?
>> Yep.
>>
>> > But which number for next version should we use?
>> 4.2 is as good as any and the tag can be edited if it's not 4.2.
>>
>> You could also rename "FlexUnit Next", but if you look at what happened
>> with the next tag for the Flex SDK you'll see it's all over the place
>>and
>> actually misleading in a few places. ie saying something was fixed in
>>the
>> next version when that version has been released.
>>
>> Justin
Re: [jira] [Updated] (FLEX-33488) FlexUnit
Posted by Cyrill Zadra <cy...@gmail.com>.
I don't mind changing it to "FlexUnit 4.2". I just don't have the rights in
JIRA so if somebody with privileges can update version label.
Cyrill
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 12:57 PM, Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com>wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > You mean for instance "FlexUnit 4.2" instead of "FlexUnit Next"?
> Yep.
>
> > But which number for next version should we use?
> 4.2 is as good as any and the tag can be edited if it's not 4.2.
>
> You could also rename "FlexUnit Next", but if you look at what happened
> with the next tag for the Flex SDK you'll see it's all over the place and
> actually misleading in a few places. ie saying something was fixed in the
> next version when that version has been released.
>
> Justin
Re: [jira] [Updated] (FLEX-33488) FlexUnit
Posted by Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com>.
Hi,
> You mean for instance "FlexUnit 4.2" instead of "FlexUnit Next"?
Yep.
> But which number for next version should we use?
4.2 is as good as any and the tag can be edited if it's not 4.2.
You could also rename "FlexUnit Next", but if you look at what happened with the next tag for the Flex SDK you'll see it's all over the place and actually misleading in a few places. ie saying something was fixed in the next version when that version has been released.
Justin
Re: [jira] [Updated] (FLEX-33488) FlexUnit
Posted by Cyrill Zadra <cy...@gmail.com>.
You mean for instance "FlexUnit 4.2" instead of "FlexUnit Next"? But which
number for next version should we use?
Cyrill
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 12:09 PM, Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com>wrote:
> Hi,
>
> A small suggestion can we not use "FlexUnit Next" as after more than one
> version has been released you don't know what version it was actually fixed
> in.
>
> Thanks,
> Justin
Re: [jira] [Updated] (FLEX-33488) FlexUnit
Posted by Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com>.
Hi,
A small suggestion can we not use "FlexUnit Next" as after more than one version has been released you don't know what version it was actually fixed in.
Thanks,
Justin