Re: Rolling master branch

[Siddhesh Poyarekar <siddhesh at redhat dot com>]

On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 01:23:50PM -0400, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> We already have something like this but not fully formalized, the
> list of blocker issues is the list of things we need to fix.

It's not the same thing.  Identifying blockers is one thing and
setting thresholds on the number of P1/P2/P3 bugs that remain open is
another thing.  The latter is aimed at chanelling developer efforts
towards reducing the bug backlog.

> Perhaps Allan's comments are more on-point here, particularly coming
> up with a strict definition of blocker would help.
> 
> Blocker:
> - ABI defects that would cause an application compiled with
>   a previous version of glibc to fail to run with the new version.
> - API defects that would cause an application to fail to compile
>   with the new version of glibc.

Unfortunately, both ideas have somewhat contradictory goals.  The
blockers approach aims at reducing time to release, while the bug
threshold idea that gcc folks have aim to improve the quality of the
release.  We can do both, but we just need to figure out how to set up
our timelines for it.

Siddhesh

Attachment: pgpXTyYPG9F3u.pgp
Description: PGP signature