Stage 3 question

[Joseph S. Myers]

On Fri, 5 Nov 2010, Paul Koning wrote:

> On Nov 3, 2010, at 4:02 PM, Paul Koning wrote:
> 
> > Question on what's appropriate...
> 
> More on the same topic: sometimes the words are "bug fixes" and 
> sometimes "regressions".  I tend to think of regressions as "it worked 
> in version x-1 but it's broken in x".  Are long-standing bugs also fair 
> game in stage 3?  Does a bug need to be in bugz to be considered?

Stage 3 is for bug fixes (whether or not in Bugzilla), it's stage 4 that's 
regression fixes only.  When you maintain a back end that is not a primary 
or secondary target in gcc-4.6/criteria.html, or a front end other than 
the C and C++ front ends considered in the criteria, you have essentially 
free rein to decide what goes in your part of the compiler during Stages 3 
and 4, whether or not bug or regression fixes - the other side of that is 
that if you make major changes that destabilise such a back end or front 
end then we won't delay branching to allow for them to be fixed, and 
non-bug-fix front-end changes that break the default build for a primary 
or secondary target are liable to be reverted.

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com