This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: bugs fixed in 3.0.3 -- second draft
- From: Joe Buck <jbuck at synopsys dot COM>
- To: neil at daikokuya dot demon dot co dot uk (Neil Booth)
- Cc: jsm28 at cam dot ac dot uk (Joseph S. Myers),pfeifer at dbai dot tuwien dot ac dot at (Gerald Pfeifer),jbuck at synopsys dot COM (Joe Buck), gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 15:42:24 -0800 (PST)
- Subject: Re: bugs fixed in 3.0.3 -- second draft
Joseph S. Myers wrote:-
>
> > A third suggestion for gathering the information - rather than supposing
> > that people know all the PR numbers fixed by a current or past commit
Neil writes:
> I wasn't implying this, just that if A knowingly fixes PR B, then A
> add it to the page in addition to closing B. Anything else is
> clearly expecting too much.
Yes, it should suffice to keep the bug database and the "fixed bugs" list
consistent: if you mark a bug closed because it is a bug that has been
fixed, it shouldn't be hard to note the fact on the list. So the only
time someone would need to change the list is when:
1) a PR is closed, corresponding to a bug fix;
2) a bug fix is ported from trunk to release branch;
3) a bug is "un-fixed" because we have to revert a patch
It seems, though, that we would need two lists at most times, one for
"fixed in the next 3.n.x release" and one for "fixed for 3.n+1".