This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Confirming a bug in new bugzilla?
- From: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Gerald Pfeifer <gerald at pfeifer dot com>
- Cc: Manuel López-Ibáñez <lopezibanez at gmail dot com>, Frédéric Buclin <LpSolit at netscape dot net>, Steve Kargl <sgk at troutmask dot apl dot washington dot edu>, Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2011 00:19:37 +0000 (UTC)
- Subject: Re: Confirming a bug in new bugzilla?
- References: <20100925054454.GA81084@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <20100925084632.GK2652@sunsite.ms.mff.cuni.cz> <20100925142844.GB83390@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <AANLkTimOy+Vqu9VW0RY+FL6N+8CZw0HTxWCO72Z_qQJc@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.LNX.2.00.1104092128530.3701@gerinyyl.fvgr>
On Sat, 9 Apr 2011, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> -<dt><b>NEW</b></dt>
> -<dd>A maintainer has verified that this is indeed a bug in GCC. Every
> -once in a while, old reports will need to be rechecked, to find out
> -whether the bug still exists.</dd>
I think this text is superior for GCC to that on the generic page and so
we should replace the text on the generic page by this GCC-specific text.
> -<dt><b>RESOLVED</b></dt>
> -<dd> A resolution has been found for this bug. The bug is either closed
> -for good, or can be re-opened and change to <b>REOPENED</b>.</dd>
Likewise. We don't use VERIFIED and CLOSED in GCC, proper text should
reflect the existence of only one closed state with a genuine meaning and
not mention the others (ideally they'd be completely hidden).
--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com