Dan Langille wrote:
> On 24 Nov 2002 at 11:05, Neil Conway wrote:
>
>> Justin Clift <justin@postgresql.org> writes:
>> > - All known bugs fixed.
>> >
>> > Except that "all known bugs fixed" isn't right. There's still that
>> > "to_cash()" bug isn't there?
>>
>> I believe that was fix when Tom overhauled OPAQUE, but I agree that
>> talking about "all known bugs" isn't a great idea.
>
> It is OK if it's true, but whether or not it is true is for others to
> decide as I don't have that knowledge.
>
I still wouldn't like it. Saying "All Known Bugs" implies that we feel there
may be bugs that we don't know about.
> Some might argue that evening mentioning bug fixes is not a good
> idea. I hold that it is better to say "we fixed X PRs" than to not
> mention it.
I would have no problem not mentioning bugs at all. Saying nothing does not
give the implication that we didn't fix any bugs, but saying something seems
to imply something worse in most cases. If we really feel we need to mention
it, I'd stay with the current wording over the given alternatives.
Robert Treat
