This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Use of Bugzilla fields
- From: Ian Lance Taylor <ian at airs dot com>
- To: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: gcc mailing list <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: 30 Oct 2005 22:01:55 -0800
- Subject: Re: Use of Bugzilla fields
- References: <43653E2C.8020000@codesourcery.com>
Mark Mitchell <mark@codesourcery.com> writes:
> P1 bugs will be bugs I think absolutely must be fixed before the next
> release; releasing with this bug would be diastrous.
>
> I'd like to use P2 to indicate that I've review the bug, and that it
> does not merit P1 status, but is important.
>
> P3 would then be the default, and would indicate that I've not yet
> reviewed the bug.
>
> P4 bugs will be ones I consider too unimportant to block the current
> release.
>
> P5 bugs will be ones I consider too unimportant to block *any* future
> release. I'm going to add links to the main web page to query for the
> regressions I think are important enough to block a release.
Could you or somebody please update the "Known regressions" bugzilla
search on the main gcc.gnu.org page to the search you are going to use
to count the number of regressions relevant for branching?
That search now returns 231 bugs, but many of them are P4 and P5
indicating that they are not relevant in determining when the release
branch is made.
Thanks.
Ian