This is the mail archive of the gcc@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: Re; Maintaining, was: Re: Reduce Dwarf Debug Size


On 02/03/07, Joe Buck <Joe.Buck@synopsys.com> wrote:
On Fri, Mar 02, 2007 at 01:31:12AM +0000, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
> On 02/03/07, Andrew Pinski <pinskia@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >A week is too short of time to ping a patch.
> >
>
> Ups! I actually believed that a week was the recommended time to ping
> a patch. What is it then?

Sometimes the only knowledgeable reviewer will be away on vacation.


And? If I knew that the only knowledgeable reviewer is away on vacation, I will hold my pings. But if I don't know, what is the problem with keeping pinging? I think 4-5-6 or 10 pings are not as important as patches that get lost in the archive, or stay in the patch queue ad infinitum, since if I keep pinging there is a chance that the patch will get reviewed someday but if I stop or get hit by a bus, there is a higher chance that the patch will be forgotten until the point of not applying anymore.

So again, what is the recommended minimum time to ping? I believed it
was 1 week because I read it somewhere but it seems I was wrong.

Cheers,

Manuel.


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