bug#1055: marked as done (Processed: severity 994 wishlist)

[Emacs bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Mon, 29 Sep 2008 21:59:14 -0400
with message-id <87ljxa1jil.fsf@cyd.mit.edu>
and subject line Re: Processed: severity 994 wishlist
has caused the Emacs bug report #1055,
regarding Processed: severity 994 wishlist
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact don@donarmstrong.com
immediately.)


-- 
1055: http://emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1055
Emacs Bug Tracking System
Contact don@donarmstrong.com with problems
> --- Begin Message ---
>
>
>
> Subject: 
>
> RE: Processed: severity 994 wishlist
>
>
>
>
> Date: 
>
> Mon, 29 Sep 2008 16:38:16 -0700
>
>
>
>
> > From: Emacs bug Tracking System Sent: Monday, September 29, 2008 3:50 PM
> > Processing commands for control@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com:
> > 
> > > severity 994 wishlist
> > bug#994: 23.0.60; minibuffer completion should act on all 
> > minibuffer input
> > Severity set to `wishlist' from `normal'
>
> Why is this fodder for the wishlist? This bug is a regression!
>
> Stefan asked for a recipe to reproduce it, so no doubt this behavior is not
> intentional (not a design change). It is bad, bugged behavior, and it is new. 
>
> Why on earth would such a bug report be classified as "wish list"? Perhaps you
> are simply wishing bugs away? ;-)
>
>
>
>
>
> --- End Message ---
> --- Begin Message ---
>
>
>
> Subject: 
>
> Re: Processed: severity 994 wishlist
>
>
>
>
> Date: 
>
> Mon, 29 Sep 2008 21:59:14 -0400
>
>
>
>
> User-agent: 
>
> Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux)
>
>
>
>
> "Drew Adams" <drew.adams@oracle.com> writes:
>
> > Why is this fodder for the wishlist? This bug is a regression!
> >
> > Stefan asked for a recipe to reproduce it, so no doubt this behavior is not
> > intentional (not a design change). It is bad, bugged behavior, and it is new. 
> >
> > Why on earth would such a bug report be classified as "wish list"? Perhaps you
> > are simply wishing bugs away? ;-)
>
> Please don't make a separate CC to bug-gnu-emacs; that creates a new bug
> entry.  Just reply to NNN@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com.
>
> The bug in question is not a regression, unless you have a rather broad
> definition of "regression".  It is neither obviously buggy nor new, so
> I'd prefer it if people work on the other outstanding issues first.
>
> But if it bugs you that much... patch welcome.  I don't want to waste
> time debating bug classification.
>
>
> --- End Message ---