I think I now understand the confusion. What happened is that there was BTF issue 624. Part of it was accidentally overwritten with a question which had nothing to do with 624. There was a short email discussion on the ETF mail list. See http://boydtechinc.com/etf/archive/etf_2004/2813.html and following. However, this question and the discussion were never intended to be in the issue database. There never should have been a Mantis 1299, unless someone wants to bring it up now as a new issue, but it is not a carryover from the 1364 database. Shalom > >SVDB 1298 _X_Yes ___No > >http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=1298 > > As Shalom pointed out, the other item that covers this is 1004, > not 1299. > However, it is covered, and we can close this item. There is > some > text at the bottom of 1298 that doesn't belong here, since it > is part > of item 1299. However, it appears in 1299 also, so no real > harm seems > to have been done.Received on Sun Feb 5 02:20:14 2006
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Feb 05 2006 - 02:23:55 PST