2.26 release blockers?
Joseph Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com
Mon Jul 10 20:12:00 GMT 2017
On Mon, 10 Jul 2017, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 1:44 PM, Carlos O'Donell <carlos@redhat.com> wrote:
> > Siddhesh,
> >
> > I added 2 release blockers:
> > https://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/Release/2.26#Release_blockers.3F
> >
> > The /etc/resolv.conf reloading and tcache are two important pieces of
> > work that I'd like to see go out this release.
> >
> > What about everyone else?
> >
> > I assume the people that chimed in on the freeze thread need to decide
> > if their work is blocker or desirable?
> >
>
> I added
>
> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12189
>
> to release block for 2.26. This is a quite old bug. We should fix it for
> 2.26.
If a bug has been present and known in releases for years, without serious
activity on it before the freeze, it can't possibly be a release blocker
without some reason other changes have made it more serious. A blocker
needs to have something to link it to the release it blocks (whether
that's being a regression, being linked to active development before the
freeze, or being an issue whose seriousness was only discovered since the
last release).
This is not an objection to a fix to this bug during the freeze should a
patch be proposed that achieves consensus as a desirable change to glibc
that is sufficiently safe on all architectures.
--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com
More information about the Libc-alpha
mailing list