Some bug policies [Was: Bug Digest 5/24]

[Daniel Berlin]

On Mon, 26 May 2003, Wolfgang Bangerth wrote:

>
> > discussed is lost until it's filed to Bugzilla. And besides, we are not
> > asking users to post their bugs in gcc-bugs.
>
> Actually we are, see
>   http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html#where
> I wanted to remove that (and instead only point to bugzilla), but given
> the resistence to get rid of the gccbug script, I felt that would not go
> through.
>
>
> > Patches should be posted to gcc-patches, and then the message linked from
> > within the bug.
>
> Unfortunately, the reality is that patches by people who's name is not
> known on gcc-patches are largely ignored. Given this, chances for patch
> review are higher if patches are posted to the bug database, and one of us
> forwards it to the person who changed the code in question last, or is in
> charge of the particular file.
>
> (I'm speaking from experience: Last year, I posted a couple of patches
> that went by unnoticed. That doesn't happen to me any more, these days.)
>
>
> > So, if you find patches that were never reviewed in the bug's audit trail,
> > you could explain the author to post it to gcc-patches.
>
> No, useless. Do it yourself. Use "cvs annotate" to find out who might be a
> suitable reviewer and contact him. Our names are known, which raises
> chances that mails are at least looked at.
>
>
> > Also, we could add a
> > keyword "patch-pending" for bugs whose patch was not reviewed yet (but I
> > kind of fear that reviewers are not going to query for it often...)
>
> Correct. Thus useless.

Well, you can make it requestable, which would email the person in
question when you made the review request, and would appear in their
request queue (accessible as "My requests" from the footer).