This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [patch/rfc] Add meaningful section titles to PROBLEMS
- From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz at elta dot co dot il>
- To: mec dot gnu at mindspring dot com (Michael Elizabeth Chastain)
- Cc: cagney at gnu dot org, gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2004 17:23:25 +0200
- Subject: Re: [patch/rfc] Add meaningful section titles to PROBLEMS
- References: <20040319174517.856F74B104@berman.michael-chastain.com>
- Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at elta dot co dot il>
> Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 12:45:17 -0500 (EST)
> From: email@example.com (Michael Elizabeth Chastain)
> When I upgrade a software package, I find the list of regressions from
> my current version to be of *great* value. For each new problem, I have
> to ascertain whether it affects my system. If it affects my system, I
> have to figure out how to work around the problem. If the problems are
> too severe, then I know that I am better off not upgrading.
I don't think regressions since version X.Y is something we need to
mention in PROBLEMS. It is an implicit assumption of users that when
they upgrade to a higher version, they have _less_ bugs, not more. If
some unfortunate release violates this principle to a high degree, we
should immediately make a bugfix release.
So I think known user-level bugs need to be mentioned, but it's not
very important to say in which release they appeared first.