This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Release Schedule issues and doubts
On Jun 4, 2006, at 2:08 AM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
On 6/4/06, Richard Sandiford <email@example.com> wrote:
Even if it's not intended that way, your proposal is probably
be interpreted at some stage as a way of punishing maintainers.
And what is wrong with that?
I have a different take... I think people should be responsible for
the patches they put in, and that means that in general, they should
work on bugs and regressions in those patches before going off on fun
new work. This, if we wanted, could be enforced by accepting patches
to fix regressions before accepting (any) other work by that person.
This transfers responsibility from the person that approved the work,
which, I'd rather not see in general, as it can discourage patch
review, to the person doing the work. We can also have this as an
optional sign me up for more responsibility type of declaration by
patch submitters. I'm happy to fix regressions my patches cause, I
consider it my obligation.
With regressions fixed sooner, we then might be able to engineer a
situation in which Mark isn't saddled with hundreds of bug fixes for
regressions, well, unless he caused them all. :-) Maybe we could
even ditch some of the stageness we presently do.
This employs the standard motivation for work, the acceptance of a
patch or not, instead of trying to use bullying tactics, we're gonna
revoke your privilege, or other such mechanisms, which, I don't think
increases the fun.