From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19615 invoked by alias); 23 May 2003 10:26:24 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 19426 invoked from network); 23 May 2003 10:26:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO cam-admin0.cambridge.arm.com) (193.131.176.54) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 23 May 2003 10:26:18 -0000 Received: from pc960.cambridge.arm.com (pc960.cambridge.arm.com [10.1.205.4]) by cam-admin0.cambridge.arm.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA21773; Fri, 23 May 2003 11:26:17 +0100 (BST) Received: from pc960.cambridge.arm.com (rearnsha@localhost) by pc960.cambridge.arm.com (8.11.6/8.9.3) with ESMTP id h4NAQHN06500; Fri, 23 May 2003 11:26:17 +0100 Message-Id: <200305231026.h4NAQHN06500@pc960.cambridge.arm.com> X-Authentication-Warning: pc960.cambridge.arm.com: rearnsha owned process doing -bs To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org cc: Richard.Earnshaw@arm.com Reply-To: Richard.Earnshaw@arm.com Organization: ARM Ltd. X-Telephone: +44 1223 400569 (direct+voicemail), +44 1223 400400 (switchbd) X-Fax: +44 1223 400410 X-Address: ARM Ltd., 110 Fulbourn Road, Cherry Hinton, Cambridge CB1 9NJ. Subject: Bugzilla and gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 10:32:00 -0000 From: Richard Earnshaw X-SW-Source: 2003-05/txt/msg02071.txt.bz2 I'd like to suggest that gcc-bugs be used only for NEW reports being entered into bugzilla, and that some other list (maybe the currently defunct gcc-prs) be used for all audit-trail mailings and follow-ups. The problem we had in the past was that gcc-bugs and gcc-prs overlapped by about 95%, which meant that both lists were practically useless. Keeping gcc-bugs as a repository for new reports only would enable developers to easily spot new bug reports coming in without having to wade through piles of junk. R.