This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: GCC
- From: dewar at gnat dot com (Robert Dewar)
- To: aaronl at vitelus dot com, s dot bosscher at student dot tudelft dot nl
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 06:08:19 -0400 (EDT)
- Subject: Re: GCC
> > I'm not sure why they think it is so difficult. It would seem that if
> > the patch is architecture-specific and well-formed (ie. conforming to
> > the coding style, etc), it typically just goes in, period. And patches
> > to target-independent code may go through one or two review cycles, but
> > again, if the patch looks good, it goes in. At least, I got the
> > impression that patches are seldomly rejected.
>
> Copyright assignments.
Please give some evidence. I think this is just a guess. In my experience,
the copyright assignment is not the issue at all. The issue is precisely
getting the patches to be well-formed, which requires quite a bit of work
and quite a bit of knowledge about the way gcc maintenance is organized.
So what often happens is that vendors prepare local patches that work fine,
but definitely do not conform (for instance they have unacceptable target
dependent patches).