Can revisions also have approximate version # on SF?
Subject: Can revisions also have approximate version # on SF?
From: Robert Dodier
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2011 13:07:56 -0600
Makes sense to me. I'll try to remember to do it,
maybe others will too.
best
Robert Dodier
On 3/15/11, Karl-Dieter Crisman <kcrisman at gmail.com> wrote:
> I made a duplicate bug report on the SF site, unknowingly (well, it's
> hard to search for math operators). No big deal - I closed it; but
> when I see that the original problem is fixed, all that bug report
> says is "Fixed in sin.lisp rev 1.82."
>
> That's not too helpful for someone wondering in what 'official'
> version of Maxima that might appear in. Might it be possible for
> people to put that in their descriptions? E.g., "Fixed in sin.lisp
> rev 1.82, part of development branch x.y.z."
>
> That would be immensely helpful for our (Sage) use, since we are
> depending on upstream for functionality, but perhaps even for the
> casual observer who sees a bug, wants it fixed, but then doesn't know
> when to download it (let's assume that our observer does not know how
> to use CVS or whatever, as many mathematical software users won't).
>
> Thanks for thinking about it!
> _______________________________________________
> Maxima mailing list
> Maxima at math.utexas.edu
> http://www.math.utexas.edu/mailman/listinfo/maxima
>