This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Patch queue and reviewing (Was Re: Generator programs can only be built with optimization enabled?)
- From: "Manuel LÃpez-IbÃÃez" <lopezibanez at gmail dot com>
- To: "Eric Botcazou" <ebotcazou at libertysurf dot fr>
- Cc: "Joe Buck" <Joe dot Buck at synopsys dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, "Mike Stump" <mrs at apple dot com>, "Daniel Berlin" <dberlin at dberlin dot org>, "Paolo Bonzini" <paolo dot bonzini at lu dot unisi dot ch>, "Mark Mitchell" <mark at codesourcery dot com>, "GCC Patches" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 10:44:53 +0100
- Subject: Re: Patch queue and reviewing (Was Re: Generator programs can only be built with optimization enabled?)
- References: <448C7B05.8030109@codesourcery.com> <96F5A03B-F997-4859-BD28-F71727B6313B@apple.com> <20060614185149.GF21013@synopsys.com> <200606142216.38604.ebotcazou@libertysurf.fr>
On 14/06/06, Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou@libertysurf.fr> wrote:
For example we could introduce
secondary maintainers with approval rights for bug fixes only or something
along these lines.
Or the secondary maintainers could review patches and reject them but
not approve them for commit. They may add comments to help the main
maintainer. This may also help in the particular situation when a
person is good enough to be a main reviewer but cannot commit herself
(perhaps temporally) to be responsive all the time. Any little help
from such person will improve the review process and keeping her away
just because she cannot dedicate all the required time to be main
maintainer is a waste of resources. Such person should be allowed to
reject patches and comment them, although the last decision would be
taken by the main maintainer.
(or maybe I am missing the point of the discussion...)