On Wed, 2005-03-02 at 16:55 -0700, Elijah Newren wrote: > On Wed, 2 Mar 2005 11:05:55 -0500, Luis Villa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I'd be happier with a tracker bug; a memory keyword will be unused > > again in 6-12 months.
Luis, what do you mean by this? > Just a though, but we could add the memory keyword, and then move all > bugs under the 'purify' keyword over to this one and nuke purify. > Then we have a fairly general keyword for memory problems, whether > they be problems found in code review, problems found from running the > program for a long time and noticing increasing memory usage, or > problems found from various tools such as purify, valgrind, memprof, > or whatever. Conceptually I like a "memory" keyword better. Maybe tracker bugs and keywords are isomorphic. ... is there an easy way to find all the tracker bugs in bugzilla? That would be a good starting point for Gnome-Love contributors and such. Initially I thought that leaks were orthogonal to reducing memory consumption in non-leaky apps, but what the hell; they are both just bloat from the viewpoint of the user :) Luis, you are the bug mastah --- in your experience, do tracker bugs or keywords work better for this kind of desktop-wide project? [What about the KnownBugs page in the memory wiki? I wanted to keep that around to be the one-stop-shop for things to fix. I like having quickly-accessible descriptions there.] Federico _______________________________________________ Gnome-bugsquad mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-bugsquad
