This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Use of Bugzilla fields
- From: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Andrew Pinski <pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu>
- Cc: gcc mailing list <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin dot org>
- Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 14:08:11 -0800
- Subject: Re: Use of Bugzilla fields
- References: <200510302202.j9UM2Kxo006201@earth.phy.uc.edu>
Andrew Pinski wrote:
>>[Danny, see below for a request.]
>>
>>In my review of open PRs against the 4.1 branch, I'm going to adopt a
>>new convention.
>>
>>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.
>
>
> It might be better to add a flag for this istead of using the priority
> field.
I think it's an appropriate use of the priority field; the priority
field is supposed to say how important the bug is, which is another way
of saying how excited we should be about fixing it in an upcoming release.
--
Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery, LLC
mark@codesourcery.com
(916) 791-8304