This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the GDB project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [maint] The GDB maintenance process

On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 06:57:01PM -0500, Andrew Cagney wrote:

> Using GNATS as the infrastructure to track patches is pathetic.

Not as pathetic as `cagney's mailbox sitting on a lapbrick with a failing hard disk'.

Well, yes. :-)  I didn't mean "you, the fellow who has put patches
into gnats, are a fool" -- I meant that the overhead over putting
patches in gnats is too high compared with just sending them to
gdb-patches.  IMHO this is a method that will fail, which is why
I dragged my feet when Elena originally requested the gdb-patches
gnats database be set up.  Ignoring the fact that gnats is a bug
tracker--not a magical patch tracking database--as long as it isn't
at the center of every developer/maintainer's patch workflow, it
will be doomed to irrelevance.

Actually the overhead is effectively zero. Any patch not touched for a week gets run through a script that turns it into a gnats entry.

Once there, I and everyone else can search it. I know of non-mainstream developers that perfer this as it is easier to pick up a task (and easier to track than either gdb@ or gdb-patches@).

It sux, but sux less than not doing it. It is interum measure that will hopefully be replaced by bugzilla.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]