GCC var-tracking-assignments: testing and bug reports appreciated
jkeating at redhat.com
Thu Sep 10 18:03:29 UTC 2009
On Thu, 2009-09-10 at 08:27 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> The largest problem I have with all this is the fact that the release
> guidelines that everyone else has to follow don't appear to be followed
> at all in this case. You're introducing a backported feature into a
> critical path package after Feature freeze, and after a mass-rebuild
> which would have arguably helped test the hell out of this. Any other
> maintainer would have to get an exception from rel-eng and/or FESCo in
> order to do something like this. I don't see why the same requirements
> don't apply here.
This is my issue too. There is claim that it was tested, yet it wasn't
tested in the same place we require every other feature to be tested,
that being rawhide.
If GCC is going to get special treatment, we should discuss, agree upon,
and document that special treatment to avoid GCC being used as an excuse
for others to ignore our policy and procedure.
Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature!
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/rel-eng/attachments/20090910/65d8b70c/attachment.bin
More information about the rel-eng