From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 76394 invoked by alias); 25 Oct 2016 02:27:26 -0000 Mailing-List: contact libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libc-alpha-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 76379 invoked by uid 89); 25 Oct 2016 02:27:24 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=H*M:533d X-HELO: homiemail-a45.g.dreamhost.com Subject: Re: GLIBC bug list on sourceware.org To: Adhemerval Zanella , GNU C Library References: From: Siddhesh Poyarekar Message-ID: <23dfa41a-12ea-533d-19a4-b4a05554d4d6@gotplt.org> Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 02:27:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2016-10/txt/msg00408.txt.bz2 On Friday 21 October 2016 01:05 AM, Adhemerval Zanella wrote: > Another following idea is to also prioritize the bugs issues once the triage > is done. > > Any thoughts, ideas, advices? Carlos and I had talked about this in the past and we had agreed on using the release freeze time to try and bring the number of pending bugs down. We could try and make that idea into a more formal process, by making the slushy freeze time an official thing and encourage devs to work on reducing the bug backlog in that time. The trouble however is that very few contributors do glibc work full time and freezes are usually the time that they move on to do other things, unless they have pending patches or features that they care about. Siddhesh