This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Zack's list of requirements
- From: "Joseph S. Myers" <jsm28 at cam dot ac dot uk>
- To: Zack Weinberg <zack at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: Tom Lord <lord at emf dot net>, <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 11:31:02 +0000 (GMT)
- Subject: Re: Zack's list of requirements
On Mon, 9 Dec 2002, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> What's the point? you may be wondering. First, it's always possible
> to recover the exact bits that the original developer tested. GCC has
> a perennial problem where someone tests the source tree at point A,
> then tests A + their changes, then does an update to point B plus
> their changes, then commits, but something in the delta between A and
> B breaks in interaction with their changes -- and what they tested,
> [A+changes], is forever lost.
GCC has a perennial problem, discussed before, where someone tests A and
keeps the result around for a while to compare with results of B+P, C+Q,
..., rather than testing B and B+P, C and C+Q, ..., or, worse, just
eyeballs the testsuite output to look for regressions.
For what you describe to work in general for patches needing review (and
possible application by someone else), presumably the changeset format
needs to be defined so as to formally include the base revision (of the
whole tree, of course) the microbranch should start at? (Not just as a
comment, as in CVS diff.)
--
Joseph S. Myers
jsm28@cam.ac.uk