This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: finding bugs deferred from previous releases
- From: Richard Biener <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>
- To: Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at redhat dot com>
- Cc: GCC Development <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2018 12:29:06 +0100
- Subject: Re: finding bugs deferred from previous releases
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <ory3k5ifew.fsf@lxoliva.fsfla.org>
On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 5:37 AM, Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@redhat.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In this round of GCC stabilization, I've noticed a larger than usual
> number of bugs that carried over from earlier cycles, with notes
> indicating it was too late to fix them during stabilization.
>
> I wish we had some means to mark such bugs clearly, so that they could
> be found easily earlier in the development cycles, instead of lingering
> on until we find it's too late again.
>
> Just targeting it to a future release might be enough during
> stabilization, but later on, it will be hard to tell these cases apart
> from other bugs for which we didn't make such assessment, and that could
> in theory still be addressed during the next round of stabilization.
>
> What I wish for is some means to find these bugs easily, while we're
> earlier in a development cycle. We could mark them as we go through the
> current regressions list, so that others wouldn't look at them again in
> this cycle, but could find them at any point in the next.
>
> Just bumping the target milestone would address part of the problem: it
> would help exclude it from bug lists that need fixing in this cycle.
> However, it wouldn't help locate these bugs during the next cycle, since
> at some point GCC8 will be out and the target milestone for all unfixed
> bugs will be bumped. Also, when we get to GCC9 stabilization, it would
> be nice to have some means to defer again any bugs that, during the
> earlier stabilization cycles, were deemed unfixable in the stabilization
> phase, so as to defer them again.
>
> Any thoughts on how to mark such bugs in bugzilla?
Add a 'defered' keyword?
Richard.
> --
> Alexandre Oliva, freedom fighter http://FSFLA.org/~lxoliva/
> You must be the change you wish to see in the world. -- Gandhi
> Be Free! -- http://FSFLA.org/ FSF Latin America board member
> Free Software Evangelist|Red Hat Brasil GNU Toolchain Engineer