This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Use of Bugzilla fields
- From: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: gcc mailing list <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin dot org>
- Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 21:50:13 +0000 (UTC)
- Subject: Re: Use of Bugzilla fields
- References: <43653E2C.8020000@codesourcery.com>
On Sun, 30 Oct 2005, Mark Mitchell wrote:
> Until now, when I've decided something is not important enough to
> require fixing for a particular release, I unset the target milestone.
> That's confusing because it might seem to mean that I'm saying the bug
> *can't* be fixed for a particular release, which isn't true.
>
> So, I'm going to adopt a new convention in these cases. In particular,
> I'm going to leave the target milestone alone, but set the priority field.
Does this mean regressions for languages and platforms other than those in
the release criteria should now have the milestone set, but be marked as
P4 or P5?
--
Joseph S. Myers http://www.srcf.ucam.org/~jsm28/gcc/
jsm@polyomino.org.uk (personal mail)
joseph@codesourcery.com (CodeSourcery mail)
jsm28@gcc.gnu.org (Bugzilla assignments and CCs)