GCC Release Status (2003-08-03)

[Daniel Berlin]

On Wednesday, August 6, 2003, at 12:37 PM, Joe Buck wrote:

> On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 08:47:07AM -0700, Mark Mitchell wrote:
>> On Tue, 2003-08-05 at 18:41, Joe Buck wrote:
>>> In any case, for every rule there's an exception: what if we 
>>> discover,
>>> after the release, that some open bug was actually fixed in 3.3.1?  
>>> Why
>>> *not* set the target milestone to 3.3.1 and add it to the list of 
>>> fixed
>>> bugs?
>>
>> I suppose that makes sense.  It's a little confusing, in that a 
>> bugzilla
>> query done after the fact will show up different results than the one
>> you used to generate the release notes,
>
> Right, but I would then correct the gcc-3.x/changes.html page on the
> web to compensate.
>
>> If you think we needn't do anything here, that's good enough for me.
>
> I don't think that we need to do anything here.  We might want to 
> revisit
> the issue five or six releases down the road, when the growing choice 
> list
> for target-milestone becomes inconvenient.  But at least for now, let's
> just leave it.

I can change the sort keys so that the active milestones are always on 
top.