This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the glibc 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: Retroactively Resolving Bugs

On Thu, 22 Feb 2018, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:

> On Thursday 22 February 2018 01:37 PM, Rical Jasan wrote:
> > I noticed BZ #16335 [0] was resolved by 6a3962c4a408 (Document missing
> > feature test macros; [1]), but I wasn't intentionally working on that
> > bug so it wasn't annotated accordingly.  I see that
> > scripts/ will catch it if I close it (FIXED with
> > target milestone), but should I also update the ChangeLog entry to
> > include the [BZ #] tag?  (While the original commit can't be amended, I
> > could also reference it in the commit message for the ChangeLog update.)
> Updating the ChangeLog should be fine IMO, encouraged in fact as long as
> we are maintaining the ChangeLog.

In the case where you find a bug was actually fixed for some past release, 
I'm less convinced of the use of updating the list of fixed bugs in that 
release in NEWS (since the main point of the NEWS section for a release is 
to go in the actual release announcement at the time of the release).  
But this is not an objection to making such updates for bugs fixed in past 
releases (and the milestone *should* still be set to the relevant past 
release in that case, to avoid the bug showing up in a search for 
recently-marked-FIXED bugs with no milestone set, which usually indicate 
someone forgetting to set the milestone when marking a bug fixed - such 
searches are thus useful to find and fix such cases of forgotten 
milestones to ensure the list of fixed bugs for the next release is as 
complete as possible).

Joseph S. Myers

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