I'd vote to update it, although it is a chore and it does tend to get
wildly out of date. What were the reasons not to have it update
automatically when the full regressions passed?
Gabe
Quoting Ali Saidi <[email protected]>:
Maybe create a new target (since we stopped doing release 2.0bX is kinda
pointless, although I can't come up with anything better).Perhaps the
target release should be date based, quarterly? 3Q2010? Anything that isn't
targeted for a new release date gets offed?
Along the same lines, we should either update or delete the m5-stable
repository
Ali
On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 15:03:29 -0700, Steve Reinhardt
begin_of_the_skype_highlighting end_of_the_skype_highlighting
<[email protected]>
wrote:
I agree that something needs to be done if we're going to make it
useful. We should have a default like "on this date we'll delete any
bug that's not flagged to keep" (or whatever mechanism we want to use)
just to start with a relatively clean baseline.
Steve
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 9:31 AM, nathan binkert <[email protected]>
wrote:
How would you guys feel about trying to spend 1 hour in the next week
or two quickly going through the flyspray database and doing bug
triage. Basically the goal would be to assign bugs and close bugs
that we won't fix, and in a few cases, perhaps, create some new ones.
I think we need to do this if we're ever to make flyspray useful.
Nate
_______________________________________________
m5-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
_______________________________________________
m5-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
_______________________________________________
m5-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
_______________________________________________
m5-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
