From: Wolfgang Bangerth <bangerth@ices.utexas.edu>
To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr@integrable-solutions.net>,
Andrew Pinski <pinskia@physics.uc.edu>
Subject: Re: Classifying bugs
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 15:08:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0401120901400.21333-100000@acapulco.ices.utexas.edu> (raw)
> The recent thread on the GCC-3.4.0 has lead some "bug masters" to
> either downgrade or close some PRs on the ground that they think they
> should not be blocking.
>
> While I understand that they are doing what they think is good
> for "clearing the road" for 3.4.0, I do not agree with the general
> trend of closing/downgrading as many as PRs as possible just to make
> to it look as if they were very few bugs. In particular, such actions
> should be conducted under clear guidance from the appropriate Release
> Manager. A Release Manager may decide to ship even if there were some
> high priority bugs; they need not be downgraded first.
I agree with this, and I disagree with many of the decisions to downgrade
bug reports. We have discussed this before on the bugzilla-masters mailing
list and have reached a conclusion that has not been followed by one
person. I would like to ask him to revisit the bugs he has changed and use
proper judgment to revert some of these decisions. Arguments like "this is
only a 2.95 regression", or "performance regressions should not block the
branch" are not valid reasons to move milestones.
Since this is not the first time he has not followed our rules, I would
also like to ask him to be extra-careful in the futue when applying
personal judgment rather than technical criteria when changing fields in
bugzilla.
Thanks
W.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wolfgang Bangerth email: bangerth@ices.utexas.edu
www: http://www.ices.utexas.edu/~bangerth/
next reply other threads:[~2004-01-12 15:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-01-12 15:08 Wolfgang Bangerth [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-01-12 15:21 S. Bosscher
2004-01-12 15:28 ` Wolfgang Bangerth
2004-01-12 6:52 Gabriel Dos Reis
2004-01-12 8:34 ` Arnaud Charlet
2004-01-12 8:40 ` Gabriel Dos Reis
2004-01-12 8:48 ` Arnaud Charlet
2004-01-12 9:06 ` Gabriel Dos Reis
2004-01-12 9:11 ` Steven Bosscher
2004-01-12 10:55 ` Giovanni Bajo
2004-01-12 14:09 ` Gabriel Dos Reis
2004-01-12 10:52 ` Giovanni Bajo
2004-01-12 14:48 ` Andrew Haley
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=Pine.LNX.4.44.0401120901400.21333-100000@acapulco.ices.utexas.edu \
--to=bangerth@ices.utexas.edu \
--cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=gdr@integrable-solutions.net \
--cc=pinskia@physics.uc.edu \
/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).