This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Bug maintenance
- From: Manuel LÃpez-IbÃÃez <lopezibanez at gmail dot com>
- To: Oleg Endo <oleg dot endo at t-online dot de>, David Wohlferd <dw at LimeGreenSocks dot com>, Martin Sebor <msebor at gmail dot com>, "gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Mon, 9 May 2016 18:03:19 +0100
- Subject: Re: Bug maintenance
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <f6229fa4-9877-f6fc-fc4e-bd011e1720cd at LimeGreenSocks dot com> <57223D52 dot 20409 at gmail dot com> <5b3e7846-fa79-7d90-0871-2d2b35027f11 at LimeGreenSocks dot com> <1462745585 dot 3864 dot 43 dot camel at t-online dot de>
On 08/05/16 23:13, Oleg Endo wrote:
There are nearly 10,000 still unresolved bugs in Bugzilla, almost
half of which are New, and a third Unconfirmed, so I'm sure any
effort to help reduce the number is of value and appreciated.
That's exactly what prompted me to ask. There's such a vast number
of them, it's hard to believe that 9 year old bugs are still of
Sometimes there is. Before randomly closing any bugs because they are
too old, one should@least have a look@them and see if they're
still an issue etc. Often things would've been fixed along the way,
but not all of them.
There are some 10-years old bugs that have a very clear description of what
needs to be done to fix them, it is just that no one has had time to do it yet.
Others don't have a clear fix, but there is a lot of info about things tried
but failed. Losing all that info would be bad.
My humble opinion is that going through the list from old to new is not the
most useful or efficient way to contribute to GCC (if it is the only way you
want to contribute, then please go ahead, it is still useful). Old bugs do not
hurt anyone except perhaps when searching for duplicates. In that case, it may
be worth spending a few minutes checking if it is fixed already, ask the
submitter for more info, or confirm it if UNCONFIRMED and updating the
description so one can see clearly that it is not a duplicate.
Triaging old bugs (except for fixing them) is not the most useful: users may
have simply forgotten all about it or not be able to reproduce it anymore or
moved on and not care...
On the other hand, it is rather more useful to start with recent bugs, which
are more likely to be relevant, and confirm them, ask for more info, find
oldest duplicate with more info, or classify them under various meta-bugs.
Rather than seeing Bugzilla as a TODO list for devs, it is rather more precise
to see it as a knowledge database about bugs.