This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Classifying bugs
- From: Wolfgang Bangerth <bangerth at ices dot utexas dot edu>
- To: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Cc: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at integrable-solutions dot net>, Andrew Pinski <pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu>
- Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 09:08:22 -0600 (CST)
- Subject: Re: Classifying bugs
> The recent thread on the GCC-3.4.0 has lead some "bug masters" to
> either downgrade or close some PRs on the ground that they think they
> should not be blocking.
>
> While I understand that they are doing what they think is good
> for "clearing the road" for 3.4.0, I do not agree with the general
> trend of closing/downgrading as many as PRs as possible just to make
> to it look as if they were very few bugs. In particular, such actions
> should be conducted under clear guidance from the appropriate Release
> Manager. A Release Manager may decide to ship even if there were some
> high priority bugs; they need not be downgraded first.
I agree with this, and I disagree with many of the decisions to downgrade
bug reports. We have discussed this before on the bugzilla-masters mailing
list and have reached a conclusion that has not been followed by one
person. I would like to ask him to revisit the bugs he has changed and use
proper judgment to revert some of these decisions. Arguments like "this is
only a 2.95 regression", or "performance regressions should not block the
branch" are not valid reasons to move milestones.
Since this is not the first time he has not followed our rules, I would
also like to ask him to be extra-careful in the futue when applying
personal judgment rather than technical criteria when changing fields in
bugzilla.
Thanks
W.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wolfgang Bangerth email: bangerth@ices.utexas.edu
www: http://www.ices.utexas.edu/~bangerth/