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: [google] Linker plugin to do function reordering using callgraph edge profiles (issue5124041)


I think you may be trolling, but I'll give you the benefit of the
doubt since you seem to be lacking some background.

On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 15:19, Michael Witten <mfwitten@gmail.com> wrote:

> Why is gnu.gcc.org hosting work that is specific to some company's
> build system?

We've long allowed different companies hold branches on gcc.gnu.org.
>From one of the links I posted in my previous response:
http://gcc.gnu.org/svn.html#distrobranches

> Why is it necessary to announce a patch [series] for this branch when it
> is intended that such a patch [series] make it to the trunk? Shouldn't an
> employee of your company submit a `trunk'-worthy patch [series] for review
> as would anyone else?

Yes, and you will see several patches from google.com addresses that
are not labeled [google].  Those are meant for trunk or devel
branches.  It is true that if a patch is meant for trunk, it should
not have a branch tag.  I expect slipups like that to occur from time
to time.  Thanks for pointing it out.

> I wonder what `issue5124041' means. Is that a reference that only has
> meaning for employees of your company?

No.  This is Rietveld, an open source code review system.  I suggested
using it for code reviews a while ago and contributed a script to
facilitate using it with GCC.  See http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/rietveld


Diego.


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