Comments on Patching GCC

[Scott Robert Ladd]

Devang Patel wrote:
> 
> On Sep 24, 2004, at 11:23 AM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> 
> On Sep 24, 2004, at 2:16 PM, Caroline Tice wrote:
>>> Is Bugzilla supposed to be used
>>> to track new feature development as well as existing bugs?  (I really 
>>> don't know; I'm just asking).
>>
>> Yes Bugzilla is used to keep track of feature development and other
>> enhancements like optimization passes
> 
> I am not sure this is true in reality. Look at the last 100 patches 
> posted on gcc-patch. How many of them has bugzilla reference ?

There's also the question of tying gcc-patches threads to bugzilla 
entries. For example: I posted a patch for a bug, and after a 
conversation with Richard Henderson, realized that my solution was too 
simple, and the problem broader than the single issue addressed by the PR.

While I've added a link to the conversation in a bugzilla comment, I'd 
guess that is not done with most patches and debates.

Somehow, we need to integrate discussions of issues with bugzilla 
tracking; otherwise, people are forced to search two places, and they 
may miss important information.

A further question: As I've noted, the PR I addressed has turned up a 
somewhat bigger problem; should the existing PR be expended, or should I 
create a new PR for the new problem domain?

-- 
Scott Robert Ladd
site: http://www.coyotegulch.com
blog: http://chaoticcoyote.blogspot.com