This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Beyond GCC 3.0
- To: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
- Subject: Re: Beyond GCC 3.0
- From: Roman Lechtchinsky <rl at cs dot tu-berlin dot de>
- Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 09:35:41 +0200 (MET DST)
- cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
> - Patches that cause regressions, even on the mainline, must
> be in the process of being fixed within 48 hours, or else can be
> reverted by anyone with global write privileges, if they think
> that's best. The idea is that you musn't check stuff in and then
> leave problems lying around for a week. This happenned more
> than once in our 3.0 development cycle.
I think it would help tremendously if patches which fix severe bugs, in
particular bootstrap failures for major platforms, could be reviewed and
applied as soon as possible. See, for instance,
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2001-06/msg01214.html
and
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2001-06/msg01619.html
which fix two bootstrap failures on sparc-sun-solaris. Such patches should
have a higher priority than, say, patches which add new features in the
review process. It doesn't make sense to require that regressions must be
fixed within a certain time period and not to apply such fixes quickly.
This is not a criticism - I understand that people who actually review
patches are working very hard, - it's just a suggestion to make the review
process more responsive to fixes for severe bugs.
Bye
Roman