From: "Giovanni Bajo" <giovannibajo@libero.it>
To: "Nathanael Nerode" <neroden@twcny.rr.com>
Cc: <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>, "Gabriel Dos Reis" <gdr@integrable-solutions.net>
Subject: Re: Suggestion for new keywords in bugzilla
Date: Tue, 27 May 2003 14:03:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <004301c32458$94527620$734e2697@bagio> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3ECE4105.4090104@twcny.rr.com>
Nathanael Nerode <neroden@twcny.rr.com> wrote:
>> I think the biggest difference is between diagnostic bugs which are
request
>> for enhancements and not strictly necessary, and diagnostic bugs which
are
>> really bugs (or at least, can be considered as such). And this difference
>> is already taken into account by the Severity of the bug. In other words
I
>> suggest that your missing-diagnostic be simply a diagnostic keyword with
>> Severity = enhancement, and you misleading-diagnostic be a diagnostic
>> keyword with Severity != enhancement.
> This isn't *exactly* what I was thinking of. A missing diagnostic might
> be a warning which is supposed to trigger and doesn't. A misleading
> diagnostic would be one which triggers but shouldn't.
>
> It may be that the distinction is not valuable. I defer to others.
Since we got no more comments on this issue, I'm creating a new keyword
"diagnostic" for now, and removing all the [diagnostic] stamps. We can still
split diagnostic into smaller parts later if we need. OTOH, Gaby never asked
for it.
Giovanni Bajo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-05-27 14:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-05-23 10:26 Giovanni Bajo
2003-05-23 15:45 ` Nathanael Nerode
2003-05-27 14:03 ` Giovanni Bajo [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-05-23 10:36 Volker Reichelt
2003-05-23 15:34 ` Nathanael Nerode
2003-05-22 17:56 Nathanael Nerode
2003-05-22 17:24 Nathanael Nerode
2003-05-22 18:19 ` Michael S. Zick
2003-05-22 18:21 ` Joseph S. Myers
2003-05-22 16:07 Volker Reichelt
2003-05-22 16:21 ` Daniel Berlin
2003-05-22 12:56 Volker Reichelt
2003-05-22 15:13 ` Giovanni Bajo
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='004301c32458$94527620$734e2697@bagio' \
--to=giovannibajo@libero.it \
--cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=gdr@integrable-solutions.net \
--cc=neroden@twcny.rr.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).