This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [patch] Lno branch merge part 12 -- induction variable optimizations
Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Sep 2, 2004, at 7:50 PM, Mark Mitchell wrote:
I'm not sure what you're saying.
I would like to approve Zdenek's patch, but I'm not nearly as expert
in this area of the compiler as other people. So, I want to give
them a chance to speak up; it's hard to take things out after they go
in. Are you saying that you think I have an obligation to approve
the patch, even though I think there are other people who might have
useful information to add?
What I am trying to say is that you should not have conditionally
approved
it based on the date which is right after the start of Stage3. By
doing that
you make anyone else who would have approved it earlier as it is already
approved.
I didn't stop anyone from approving it sooner. If someone would like to
do approve it right now, they certainly can. Would like me to retract
my conditional approval?
Also if you were so worry about timing of stage3 and number of
projects going
in for 3.5.0, you should have asked for Projects to be submitted in
stage1
while things were in development.
In retrospect, I agree. That's why in the next release I plant to ask
for these kinds of proposals much earlier, as I mentioned in my last
status report. I thought that I had a better handle on the state of the
outstanding work than I did.
I did consult very actively with the tree-ssa people during stage 1. In
fact, I organized a conference call which helped lead to the plan that
Diego put together for the merge, and I worked with the SC to help
ratify that plan. Of course, things do not always go perfectly
according to plan. I've also been involved in conference calls with
some of the key LNO developers to try to understand what's going on
there, and I have asked for -- and received -- the same kind of roadmap
I asked for and recieved with respect to strees.
Really I think the situational here just sucks and could have been planed
way in advanced of stage3 instead of three weeks. Maybe the SC should
reconsider you as the release manager as you are not doing your job
except
when it comes to the end of stage2.
I do indeed serve at the pleasure of the SC.
I thank you for your feedback. I am constantly learning, and hopefully
getting better in my role, but I know I can do better as time passes,
and criticism helps.
--
Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery, LLC
(916) 791-8304
mark@codesourcery.com