This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: 3.4 regressions: are 2.95 regressions still actual
- From: Wolfgang Bangerth <bangerth at ices dot utexas dot edu>
- To: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Cc: Steven Bosscher <s dot bosscher at student dot tudelft dot nl>, Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>, Giovanni Bajo <giovannibajo at libero dot it>, Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at integrable-solutions dot net>, Nathan Sidwell <nathan at codesourcery dot com>
- Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 08:57:18 -0600 (CST)
- Subject: Re: 3.4 regressions: are 2.95 regressions still actual
>> The priority field should indicate the importance of the bug.
>> Regressions should still be targetted at the next scheduled release
>> (until the RM decides otherwise).
>
> OK. But then the RM should also look at the importance of tbe bug, not
> just the target milestone.
Our (extensively discussed) policy has been to mark all regressions for
the next release, and that only the RM should be allowed to slip a PR to a
later release (as this is a political, not a technical decision). I would
like to keep to this policy. Otherwise, we would all start to assign
milestones at our own priority.
W.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wolfgang Bangerth email: bangerth@ices.utexas.edu
www: http://www.ices.utexas.edu/~bangerth/