On Thu, 2010-03-25 at 19:35 -0400, David Malcolm wrote: > (b) the critically important frame information within the heart of the > bytecode excution loop ought to tell us what code we're running, but is > showing up in gdb as "optimized out". (specifically, the "f" parameter > to function PyEval_EvalFrameEx). > > Unfortunately, this greatly reduces the effectiveness of the feature > (it's still somewhat useful without this, but the feature page would > need a significant rewrite if this doesn't get fixed). > > This looks like a regression of rhbz:556975: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=556975 > > I don't know if this is a gcc/gdb/python issue. > > I've reopened this bug. I haven't yet added it to any of the tracker > bugs: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping/Trackers > > Which tracker should this be in? This is a tricky question. We haven't really answered the question yet of whether bugs impacting the implementation of accepted features for a release should be treated as release blockers; so far we've worked strictly on the basis of the release criteria, which are more about whether the release meets certain targets for quality, more or less regardless of the deeper functionality of the software it contains. I'm not sure it's a super-simple question to answer. The classic question to ask about a proposed blocker bug is 'would we delay the release if this was the only bug in it?', and that's a tough question to answer in the context of something which is essentially an RFE, and one which can be fixed post-release without really causing anyone any significant pain. So the short answer is that at present, we - by 'we' I mean the qa/releng folks who mostly do the release shepherding process - wouldn't consider this bug to be a candidate for F13Beta or F13Blocker. You could put it on F13Target, but the Target tracker has its own problems at present, the short version of which is that basically everyone ignores it. So go ahead, but it likely will have little practical impact... There's obviously space to improve the process here. There may well be space for a dedicated tracker for bugs affecting the implementation of planned features. What various groups - qa, releng, devel - would *do* with such a tracker is also an open question. Ideas? -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
