I've reviewed all 311 bugs that were targeted at 4.0.2/4.1.0 and that were marked as 4.1 regressions.
My first comment is that we had a lot of bugs targeted at 4.1.0 that should never have been so targeted. Please remember that bugs that do not effect primary or secondary targets should not have a target milestone. There are several PRs that seem to have had target milestones re-added after I removed them before, though it could also be that I failed to remove the milestone, even though I added a comment to that effect. PR 17356 is an example of such a PR, though in this case it looks like it was Andrew Pinski who removed the target milestone. PR 18190 is another example. In fact, it almost looks like someone went through and methodically re-added target milestones to all the PRs for which they had been removed. If that's the case, please stop! After removing target milestones for bugs that appeared to have been spuriously marked, there are 271 bugs targeted at 4.1. (I left a few bugs that seemed to refer to languages/platforms that aren't release-critical, on the grounds that the bugs seemed to reflect generic problems, but I may remove even these as we move forward, unless C/C++ examples are added that demonstrate the genericity.) Of these, 91 are wrong-code (26), ice-on-valid, or rejects-valid. That's not too bad. There are a lot of C++ bugs -- but most are ICEs or bad/missed error messages. (Quite a few of the diagnostic messages stem from the design decision to issue warnings from the optimizers...) There are a lot of missed-optimization bugs that represent regressions. There are the usual cast of bugs relating to extensions, including things like supporting C99 features in C++. Although, overall, I feel pretty good about the fact that the *severity* of most of the open bugs is not too high, I'm not happy with the overall *quantity* of bugs. In the past, we've aimed for 100 open regressions before making the branch, and I don't think that's an unreasonable target. Therefore, as I hinted earlier, I think Stage 3 is going to have to slip. However, if ten people commit to fixing a regression a day, we should be able to reach 100 bugs in about three weeks, even allowing for some new bugs popping up as we go -- which would put us at mid-September. The most important thing is that people stop working on clean-ups and new features -- and truly concentrate on fixing bugs. I don't want to be draconian about that, but let's get the bugs fixed. -- Mark Mitchell CodeSourcery, LLC [EMAIL PROTECTED]
