Camillo Bruni wrote:
> that implies that we have to migrate the PharoInbox :)
> otherwise we will have a mess of higher order matching slices numbers and issue numbers on fogbugz.
>
> On 2013-03-10, at 18:13, Benjamin <
[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> The problem is that you can not specify a id for issue while migrating.
>>
This might not be useful at this stage, but I would guess that starting
with an empty Fogbugz tracker, you could create a blank case, then suck
the matching case number from Google, after which you update the Fogbugz
case title.
-ben
>> To prevent collision, the issues reported to fogbugz should start at id: 10000.
>>
>> Ben
>>
>> On Mar 10, 2013, at 4:34 PM, Ben Coman <
[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I just noticed (for example) that
https://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=6763>>> has been migrated as
https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/6700.
>>>
>>> Is that change of issue number a concern to break the convention of slice names matching issue numbers
>>> as well as historical issue cross referencing?
>>>
>>> hope I'm missing something..
>>>
>>> regards -ben
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>