Summary: Sorry for length of this, but recent bugzilla posts suggest
we should try to have a clearer policy about when/how to raise
compilation or library/build policy issues.
I hope posting this will save a bit of a time in the longer run.
Ed's last four new "bugs" have been about library or build policies
(in case of bugs 364 and 365 actually related to current bugs, but not
well researched or pointed to, IMO); or about a possible error in the
code (that does not AFAIK cause an actual issue).
Entered as "remove unneeded taglib"
Now titled as "Switch from libidtag to taglib?":
Entered as "remove unneeded slv2"
now "LV2 support unfinished":
"considerations for keeping ANSI builds"
"source code has invalid std::cout in Nyquist should be wcout"
My take is that as 364/365 were about the possible need to remove
libraries or standardise whether they were built, -devel would have
been better (though I think recording the outcome on bugzilla for
tracking was/is worth doing).
My take on 371 was that it was too vague and not thought through
to be a bug. Given that, it should have been raised with me, or on
feedback@... Not raised on -quality until the issues are clear.
374 I think should probably have been on -devel too. Ed seems
convinced there is a problem, but no-one else is sure what it is.
I think the current idea is that compilation and linking errors, plus
compilation warnings (if in our code, not lib-src) are better posted
on -devel. Ignore if lib-src warning. Is that correct? That seems OK,
but if a response about a warning falls between the cracks, then as
with patches, we must be sure items get moved to bugzilla so they
don't get lost.
Meantime Ed has also told me that he would like a component for
"Compilation" instead of these issues going into "Other" as now.
This would be an issue like:
where the problem is with optional behaviour on Linux. I'm not sure if
"Compiling" is a component. I could envisage "Compiler" for something
to do with GCC or VS, or "Libraries".
Or we could fit to the nearest component and keyword it as
We're also trying having a summary bug:
to control component bugs about building and linking, but I'm not sure
it works all that well given some higher priority issues need their own
From: Vaughan Johnson <vaughan@au...> - 2011-04-19 23:47:48
On 4/19/2011 12:01 AM, gale@... wrote:
> Summary: Sorry for length of this, but recent bugzilla posts suggest
> we should try to have a clearer policy about when/how to raise
> compilation or library/build policy issues.
> I think the current idea is that compilation and linking errors, plus
> compilation warnings (if in our code, not lib-src) are better posted
> on -devel.
>Ignore if lib-src warning.