This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [maint] The GDB maintenance process
On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 06:57:01PM -0500, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> Using GNATS as the infrastructure to track patches is pathetic.
Not as pathetic as `cagney's mailbox sitting on a lapbrick with a
failing hard disk'.
Well, yes. :-) I didn't mean "you, the fellow who has put patches
into gnats, are a fool" -- I meant that the overhead over putting
patches in gnats is too high compared with just sending them to
gdb-patches. IMHO this is a method that will fail, which is why
I dragged my feet when Elena originally requested the gdb-patches
gnats database be set up. Ignoring the fact that gnats is a bug
tracker--not a magical patch tracking database--as long as it isn't
at the center of every developer/maintainer's patch workflow, it
will be doomed to irrelevance.
Actually the overhead is effectively zero. Any patch not touched for a
week gets run through a script that turns it into a gnats entry.
Once there, I and everyone else can search it. I know of non-mainstream
developers that perfer this as it is easier to pick up a task (and
easier to track than either gdb@ or gdb-patches@).
It sux, but sux less than not doing it. It is interum measure that will
hopefully be replaced by bugzilla.