[cfe-dev] [llvm-dev] [RFC] LLVM bug lifecycle BoF - triaging

[Richard Smith via cfe-dev]

On Wed, 31 Oct 2018, 10:47 David Greene via cfe-dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
wrote:

> Richard Smith via cfe-dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> writes:
>
> > In fact, I think it'd be entirely reasonable to subscribe cfe-dev to
> > all clang bugs (fully subscribe -- email on all updates!). I don't see
> > any reason whatsoever why a bug update should get *less* attention
> > than non-bug development discussion.
>
> Some of us are on space-limited machines (I'm thinking of personal
> equipment, not corporate infrastructure) and getting all bug updates for
> components could put a real squeeze on things.
>
> I agree that cfe-bugs, for example, should get copied on all updates but
> those updates should be opt-in.
>

Assuming we go that way, do you think it's reasonable for someone to want
to subscribe to cfe-dev but not cfe-bugs? What's the use case for that? If
it's email volume, that choice would prioritize the discussion of "I'm not
sure this is a bug" or "what's going on here?" plus general dev discussion
and announcements (cfe-dev) over the discussion of "I'm confident that this
is a bug" (cfe-bugs).

Perhaps we should have a separate cfe-announce list for people who want to
stay informed but not drink from the firehose of development discussion
(current cfe-dev plus clang bug updates).

                         -David
> _______________________________________________
> cfe-dev mailing list
> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20181031/302468da/attachment.html>