Re: Radical proposal: skip 3.4

[Andreas Tobler <toa at pop dot agri dot ch>]

Jim Wilson wrote:
> I agree with the comment Steve Bosscher made.  The number of bugs in 
> bugzilla is not a good indication of the quality of gcc mainline.  It is 
> more an indication of how many people are using gcc, and how many are 
> using the bugzilla database.  Back when we were doing gcc-3.0, people 
> would report bugs directly to gcc-bugs, and then they would be lost. 
> Nowadays, they accumulate in the bug database, and don't disappear 
> unless they are fixed.  Also, there are a lot more people using gcc-3.3 
> than there were using gcc-3.0, and hence there are more people finding 
> bugs.  That doesn't mean that there are more bugs, just that more are 
> being reported.

If have to agree here too. More bugs does not mean less quality per se.
It means that the component gets actively used and stress tested.

We once had a project with only 50 test cases, all went fine and the 
impression was wow, good quality, but the opposite was the case. The 
quality was pretty bad. We did not test enough and therfore we didn't 
find bugs.
Now our projects contain much more test cases and the success/failure 
ratio doesn't look that good anymore. But the responsible manager knows, 
the quality is much better since we heavily test and stress. And we find 
the bugs we have in our code.

Also, I feel much more comfortable with bugzilla and it's maintainers. 
And I feel that if I have a bug it gets actively tracked and most 
probable worked on.

Just my 2 rappen.

Andreas