[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GCC v. Arch address@hidden: Regressions on mainline
From: |
Andrew Suffield |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GCC v. Arch address@hidden: Regressions on mainline] |
Date: |
Tue, 22 Jun 2004 13:20:28 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.6+20040523i |
Huh, interesting timing. I've been thinking about this problem for a
week or two, and started to put together some of the intrastructure it
needs.
Certainly gcc is a good example of a project which this problem, but
I'm not convinced their approach is the best solution. A PQM-driven
mainline that only allows commits which do not cause regressions is
probably what they really want. But it's easy enough to handle what
they currently do.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GCC v. Arch address@hidden: Regressions on mainline],
Andrew Suffield <=
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GCC v. Arch address@hidden: Regressions on mainline], Colin Walters, 2004/06/22
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GCC v. Arch address@hidden: Regressions on mainline], Andrew Suffield, 2004/06/22
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GCC v. Arch address@hidden: Regressions on mainline], Colin Walters, 2004/06/22
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GCC v. Arch address@hidden: Regressions on mainline], Andrew Suffield, 2004/06/22
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GCC v. Arch address@hidden: Regressions on mainline], Colin Walters, 2004/06/22
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GCC v. Arch address@hidden: Regressions on mainline], Andrew Suffield, 2004/06/22
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GCC v. Arch address@hidden: Regressions on mainline], Colin Walters, 2004/06/22
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GCC v. Arch address@hidden: Regressions on mainline], Andrew Suffield, 2004/06/23
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GCC v. Arch address@hidden: Regressions on mainline], Colin Walters, 2004/06/23
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GCC v. Arch address@hidden: Regressions on mainline], Andrew Suffield, 2004/06/23