From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31193 invoked by alias); 23 Nov 2004 17:23:34 -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 31167 invoked from network); 23 Nov 2004 17:23:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (65.74.133.9) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 23 Nov 2004 17:23:29 -0000 Received: (qmail 9375 invoked from network); 23 Nov 2004 17:23:28 -0000 Received: from localhost (HELO ?192.168.0.101?) (mitchell@127.0.0.1) by mail.codesourcery.com with SMTP; 23 Nov 2004 17:23:28 -0000 Message-ID: <41A37209.2000301@codesourcery.com> Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 18:02:00 -0000 From: Mark Mitchell Organization: CodeSourcery, LLC User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.9 (Windows/20041103) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Giovanni Bajo CC: Janis Johnson , mrs@apple.com, gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: Mainline in regression-fix mode after Thanksgiving References: <200411230026.iAN0QqeO005220@sirius.codesourcery.com> <884E869E-56B9-43AD-ACDD-0F2A47287087@apple.com> <41A29C79.5070803@codesourcery.com> <20041123170139.GA4463@us.ibm.com> <095801c4d180$19e95e40$f503030a@mimas> In-Reply-To: <095801c4d180$19e95e40$f503030a@mimas> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004-11/txt/msg00830.txt.bz2 Giovanni Bajo wrote: > Janis Johnson wrote: > Note that I do not agree. If Mark Mitchell agrees, we can setup a policy to It's not purely for me to say. Making it our policy to auto-assign regressions would be something of a societal change, and, as such, should only be done as part of a broader consensus. Personally, I think this is a reasonable thing to do, and I've in fact given the bugmasters explict permission to assign bugs to me if the regression comes from a patch I've committed. Assigning the regression, however, is only half the problem: the other problem is getting the assignee to actually fix the problem. We have no very effective mechanism for that. There are, I suppose, steps we could take: we could forbid people from checking in changes while they have outstanding regressions open, for example. I do not think such a strict policy would be constructive. (One problem, for example: some regressions may not be very important.) -- Mark Mitchell CodeSourcery, LLC mark@codesourcery.com (916) 791-8304