This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: your RESOLVED->CLOSED changes

From: "John Anthony Kazos Jr." <jkazos at vt dot edu>
To: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 10:18:55 -0400
Subject: Re: your RESOLVED->CLOSED changes
References: <407601c32111$2dc742e0$c64f2697@bagio>

I would also like to posit that quite a number of bugs will then stay
RESOLVED indefinitely. If someone, say, fixes a bug on mn10200 or some
other obscure target, who's going to double-check after a release and put
in into CLOSED?

Doesn't that prove the lack of QA, and demonstrate the need for it? If a fix hasn't been checked, it *should* remain resolved-but-unclosed indefinately until someone checks it. Otherwise, why bother checking fixes at all?

References:
- Re: your RESOLVED->CLOSED changes
  - From: Giovanni Bajo
- Re: your RESOLVED->CLOSED changes
  - From: Wolfgang Bangerth

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]