Jason Merrill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I think that the release process for recent releases has given undue > priority to bugs marked as regressions. I agree that it's important > for things that worked in the previous release to keep working in the > new release. But the regression tag is used for much more trivial > things.
We had a discussion of these sorts of issues at the GCC mini-summit back in April. We didn't come to any conclusions. But there are some notes here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2007-04/msg00676.html The goal is presumably: how can we produce the highest quality release? I agree that our single-minded focus on regressions is misleading. For example, it might be better to produce a more nuanced list of bugs which must be fixed, which should be fixed, and which we would like to fix. Then we can set numeric targets for each level, to be acheived before the release. However, this would require a lot more effort. It would be a lot of work for one person--and who would that person be? If many people did it, then how would we keep consistency? Ian
