This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [www-patch] bugs/management.html: document new keyword "meta-bug"
- From: Volker Reichelt <reichelt at igpm dot rwth-aachen dot de>
- To: gerald at pfeifer dot com
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2003 14:35:42 +0200 (CEST)
- Subject: Re: [www-patch] bugs/management.html: document new keyword "meta-bug"
- Reply-to: Volker Reichelt <reichelt at igpm dot rwth-aachen dot de>
On 14 Oct, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Oct 2003, Volker Reichelt wrote:
>> Index: management.html
>> +<p><strong>Meta-bugs (reports with the keyword "meta-bug")</strong> are
>> +used to group PR's that have a common denominator. Meta-bugs do not have
>> +own testcases, but provide links to regular PR's via Bugzilla's "depends
>> +on/blocks" mechanism instead
> "testcases of their own"?
> And I recall that I recently read an essay (actually, a rant) that one
> should use PRs, not PR's (in a different context and with a different
> noun, though).
Well, both versions appear to be correct, but "the latest trend in the uses
of the apostrophe to pluralize numbers and abbreviations is to not include
an apostrophe" (according to http://www.augsburg.edu/writinglab/apostrophe.htm).
So I'll go woth your suggestion.
Btw, shouldn't we add a paragraph about apostrophes and abbreviations to
>> + (a link to a regular PR is added via
>> +"depends on <em>PR-number</em>" on the Bugzilla page of the meta-bug).
> Perhaps omit this to keep the page a bit shorter? (I'm not a Bugzilla
> expert, but even for me this bit was evident when I first saw it on the
> web page. <g>)
Well, the intention was to get the direction of the dependency right.
How about the following?
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/bugs/management.html,v
retrieving revision 1.18
diff -u -p -r1.18 management.html
--- management.html 5 Oct 2003 12:54:35 -0000 1.18
+++ management.html 13 Oct 2003 23:37:53 -0000
@@ -207,6 +207,13 @@ severity "<strong>critical</strong>" to
be downgraded later if a defect is not important enough to justify
+<p><strong>Meta-bugs (reports with the keyword "meta-bug")</strong> are
+used to group PRs that have a common denominator. Meta-bugs do not have
+testcases of their own, but provide links to regular PRs via Bugzilla's
+"depends on/blocks" mechanism instead: the meta-bugs depend on the regular
+PRs. Information concerning the majority of bugs blocking a meta-bug
+should be added to the meta-bug instead of each single PR.</p>
<p><strong>Bugs with keyword "ice-on-invalid-code"</strong>, where GCC
emits a sensible error message before issuing an ICE (the ICE will be
replaced by the message "confused by earlier errors, bailing out" in