This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Mainline in regression-fix mode after Thanksgiving
"Giovanni Bajo" <rasky@develer.com> writes:
> Mike Stump <mrs@apple.com> wrote:
>> So, let me ask if anyone who puts in patches would object to having
>> regressions assigned to them? If no one objects, I'd say, lets just
>> make it policy.
>
> Any takers?
Well, I don't object to anyone doing this for my patches, but I really
do think Joe's description of how the assigned field should work is better.
For example, if I'm in a bug-fixing mood, the first thing I'll do is
search bugzilla for MIPS PRs. And since this is something I do in my
spare time, I don't want to waste it by duplicating other people's work.
So I'll pick the bugs that aren't yet assigned to anyone.
You (Giovanni) say that people could just unassign themselves if they
don't plan to look at a PR soon. Although that's clearly the case _in
principle_, in practice, this often doesn't happen. There are several
target-independent bugs with a MIPS target field that have been assigned
(to non-MIPS maintainers) for many months without any apparent action.
[No criticism implied, btw. I'm not whiter than white here.]
As I think Joe said, if the PR trail already mentions the patch that
caused a regression, putting the name of the patch author in the assigned
field doesn't add any more information. It actually removes information,
because PRs then go into an uncertain "is anyone really going to look at
this or not?" state.
Richard