Public SourceMage Discussion List

["David Brown" <dmlb2000 AT gmail.com>]

On 4/15/07, Jeremy Blosser <jblosser AT firinn.org> wrote:
> On Apr 15, Jeremy Blosser [jblosser AT firinn.org] wrote:
> > On Sun, 15 Apr 2007 19:34, David Brown wrote:
> > > I'd love to get stable-rc out the door this weekend but no one is
> > > around to do the git thing to make it work.
> > >
> > > Bug 13330 is fixed with a blanket swap of -Os with -O2 and that was
> > > the only bug that I saw gating.
> > >
> > > Other than doing all the git stuff and making tarballs I don't see why
> > > stable 0.9 can't get out the door this weekend.
> > >
> > > For those who care.
> > >
> > > - David Brown
> >
> > I'll be home in an hour or so, I can do it then.
>
> Well, no, because I'm not sure what's supposed to be going on with bug
> 13330.  I see there was a lot of IRC chatter about that today and then that
> commit was made and from the comments above and in the bug I think you
> meant to request it be integrated to -rc-0.9, but I'm not sure because none
> of the version or flags are set on the bug to request integration.

agreed, I'd like to see something from those that had the problems but
apparently they are too busy with other things, I can roll back the
change until something happens to try and fix the bug but there just
isn't any work being done with it.

> I'm also not inclined to approve integration or roll a release with a
> change to a major spell like gcc at the 11th hour when no one seems to know
> what the problem is or if that's even a relevant fix; the bug comments are
> all over the place and far from anything definitive.  When did this issue
> show up?  In this -rc cycle, or the last stable cycle, or has it been
> pre-existing?

Also agreed, but I'm not the one who called the bug gating ;)

> Eric, I'd like to see some kind of hard freeze added into the -rc release
> process.  I don't like major changes going in at the very end just to get
> past bugs flagged gating that no one has had time to look at.  If people
> are going to do that they should be required to do it <n> days before the
> release happens, where <n> is at least something greater than 1 (I'd really
> say at least 3 or 4).  Fixes that want to go in after the freeze (such as
> fixes for gating bugs) could be allowed but they'd always push the release
> date back to at least <n> days from when they are applied.  This was
> discussed briefly on IRC at the end of the last release cycle but nothing
> was actually put into the process for it.  Thoughts?

I'd also like seeing something put in place for bugs that can't make
any progress. If a sizable effort has been made by those working on
the stable release to close the bug and the bug gets to a state where
it can't progress and nothing is happening it would be nice to have
some method for someone else to change the bugs status because the bug
is stagnant, needs more testing, etc.

- David Brown