Re: [PATCHES] Unreviewed patches

[Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin dot org>]

On Thursday, March 27, 2003, at 03:14  PM, David Edelsohn wrote:

> do not copyprop no-op sets:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/2003-03/msg01445.html
>
> store motion rewrite:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2003-03/msg00467.html
>
> combine zero_extract:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2003-03/msg01311.html
>
> Remove REG_EQUAL note on mems hoisted out of loops:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2003-03/msg02237.html
>
> Insns on edges in bypass:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2003-03/msg02162.html
>
> wrapv optimization:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2003-03/msg02126.html
>
> Move subregs to pseudos for comparison:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2003-03/msg02100.html
>
> Poolify df.c:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2003-03/msg01844.html
Actually, michael Hayes looked at this one.
His implication (I think, but i might have misunderstood) was that i 
could approve it myself, but it wasn't clear, since while he 
contributed the file originally, and i did a lot of work on it, but 
neither of us are listed as a maintainer for it.
IE from http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2003-03/msg02008.html
"> Do you maintain df.c, since you contributed it? Or do i need approval
 > from someone else?

Well I guess we both are although it is not explicitly stated.

Michael.
"


What's the rule on this type of situation?  Are the people who 
contribute (and possibly people who make large contributions to) a file 
the maintainer of it, and thus, able to approve patchs to it, even if 
nobody ever bothered to list the file/them in MAINTAINERS?
--Dan