This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Retiring gccbug script?
- From: "Joseph S. Myers" <jsm28 at cam dot ac dot uk>
- To: Craig Rodrigues <rodrigc at mediaone dot net>
- Cc: <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, <overseers at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 09:38:32 +0000 (GMT)
- Subject: Re: Retiring gccbug script?
On Fri, 4 Jan 2002, Craig Rodrigues wrote:
> - it does not submit attachments, and this is awkward
> and time consuming when it comes to analyzing the
> report in GNATS
It includes plain text testcases for the bug, that can be read directly
when receiving them on gcc-bugs or gcc-prs. I might fix a bug when I
receive it on gcc-bugs if the testcase is plain text; if it's the
base64-encoded junk (which is not a proper MIME attachment) that gnatsweb
generates in PRs, I'm not going to investigate the problem or see whether
it's of interest until much later.
If you want attachments in gccbug-generated PRs, if we move to Bugzilla
then add an attachment facility to the new gccbug script, but make sure
that the resulting gcc-bugs/gcc-prs messages, whatever bug submission
mechanism is used, include the attachments as proper MIME parts,
text/whatever if small or compressed otherwise.
> - it does not give a clear idea how to add more information
> to a bug report after it has been filed
Reply to the acknowledgment message including gcc-gnats. The Reply-To on
the messages is set correctly. Adjust the text of the messages (and
gnats.html) if this isn't clear enough.
> - I'm seeing more gccbug submitted bug reports in GNATS that
> are corrupted (pending category)
These are not gccbug-submitted - it doesn't let you submit with the
pending category. These are where people have sent other mail - not PR
submissions or follow-ups - to gcc-gnats. A human moderator for badly
formatted gcc-gnats mail would be better than filing it as PRs in
"pending".
> What opinions do people have on removing gccbug?
> The guidelines at http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html
> do not even mention it.
On the contrary, it is the recommended means of bug submission. It does
not create PRs with version listed as "unknown-1.0". bugs.html clearly
tells you that the GNATS system is preferred to mailing gcc-bugs, with a
link to gnats.html; gnats.html clearly tells you that the gccbug script is
the preferred interface for bug submission.
I don't consider web forms a good means of bug submission. With gccbug
one can use a text editor for editing bug report text rather than being
constrained into using a web browser, and can submit bug reports offline.
Perhaps the gnatsweb submission form should make clearer that people
should use gccbug if possible.
--
Joseph S. Myers
jsm28@cam.ac.uk