Re: GCC 4.0 Status Report (2005-02-03)

[Andrew Pinski <pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu>]

On Feb 6, 2005, at 4:41 AM, Zack Weinberg wrote:

> On Thu, 2005-02-03 at 11:49 -0800, Mark Mitchell wrote:
> ...
> > However, before that happens, it is important that we have a coherent
> > strategy for GCC 4.1.  There are a number of major branches (and
> > perhaps done on work that is not on a branch) that people will want to
> > integrate, and we must do that in an orderly fashion.
> >
> > Therefore, we will use the same proposal-based procedure that we used
> > (late) in the GCC 4.0 timeframe.
>
> I would like to make two suggestions for additions to this procedure.
> First, I think it would be a good move to file tracker bugs in Bugzilla
> for each proposal, possibly with dependent bugs for subtasks.  A 
> similar
> procedure seems to work very well for the Mozilla folks.

I want to second this.  This is important to get a better feeling
on how these proposals are progressing.  (It is not hard to
create a keyword for a proposal so we know which bug is a proposal
or not).  It is also easier to track the dependancies between
proposals.

-- Pinski