This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Patch queue and reviewing (Was Re: Generator programs can only be built with optimization enabled?)


>>>>> "Dan" == Daniel Berlin <dberlin@dberlin.org> writes:

Dan> It can also tell you who to copy on a ping email to make sure it
Dan> actually goes to a maintainer.
Dan> the interface is under construction, but "okay" for casual use.
Dan> http://www.dberlin.org/patches/patches/maintainer_list/745 would be the
Dan> one for this patch.

This one is funny because many of the maintainers on that list are
very inactive.

I think we ought to retire inactive maintainers, by moving them to a
"Maintainer Emeritus" section -- they wouldn't lose any rights, but at
the same time we wouldn't be giving patch submitters false hope that
there is a large number of maintainers available.

Dan> I could try generating the ping mails for single patches automatically,
Dan> and try to randomly disperse them so that you can't just ignore some
Dan> email bomb of ping emails, but this seems like it should be unnecessary.

This would help me, except that java folks don't seem to use the
patch queue.

For Classpath we're much more aggressive about giving people patch
approval status.  Of course, our situation is a bit different, since
Classpath is more modular than GCC.  A look through the
write-after-approval list to see if anybody there really could be
"promoted" would help... if nobody there stands out, then our problem
is just lack of developers, which requires a different sort of
solution.

Tom


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]