This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Severities and priorities in bugzilla
- From: "Giovanni Bajo" <giovannibajo at libero dot it>
- To: "Wolfgang Bangerth" <bangerth at ices dot utexas dot edu>,"Falk Hueffner" <falk dot hueffner at student dot uni-tuebingen dot de>
- Cc: <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>,<dberlin at dberlin dot org>,"Gerald Pfeifer" <pfeifer at dbai dot tuwien dot ac dot at>
- Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2003 17:56:19 +0200
- Subject: Re: Severities and priorities in bugzilla
- References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0306031002590.21442-100000@gandalf.ices.utexas.edu> <87ptlvjhfy.fsf@student.uni-tuebingen.de>
Falk Hueffner <falk.hueffner@student.uni-tuebingen.de> wrote:
>> To me, having Severity, Priority, and Milestone is still a little
>> confusing. Is there a way to enforce that all P1 priority bugs have a
>> milestone set?
> How about kicking Priorities completely?
Agreed, unless someone explain me (possibly with examples) the situations
where we should set Critical+P3 or Minor+P1 (the corner cases). I think
priority and severity are kind of overloaded concepts for many people
(including myself). My idea was that for instance we could use Critical+P3
for a bug where GCC formats your hard disk if (and only if) the input file
is made of exactly 12345678 zeros plus a newline, and Minor+P1 if all the
warning line numbers are off by one, but after a while I realized that there
is so need for such a strict separation of concepts.
I think we can get rid of either priority or severity.
Giovanni Bajo