This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Proposal: Improving patch tracking and review using Rietveld
On Fri, 28 Jan 2011, Diego Novillo wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 19:44, Joseph S. Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, 26 Jan 2011, Diego Novillo wrote:
> >
> >> 1- Rietveld always send the patch sent to it to gcc-patches@ (provided
> >> the submitter added gcc-patches to the CC list).
> >
> > <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-01/msg02069.html> appears to be a
> > patch sent using this system where it failed to include the patch in the
> > message to gcc-patches.
>
> Hm, yes. I hadn't noticed it because I'm not actually used to the
> patch being included (we conduct reviews on the web interface
> directly). The issue is with the length of the original patch. If
> it's too long, it will not include it in the initial message.
The gcc-patches message size limit is 400000 bytes. I don't know exactly
how that's counted (e.g. whether headers are included), but it should give
some indication of the appropriate size limit to configure for GCC (I
presume this is configurable); the patch in question appears to have been
far below that size.
If a patch (over 400kB) is being excluded from the message because of size
(and somewhat larger patches could still be included as gzipped
attachments, though very few patches approach 400kB anyway), it would be
good for the message to explicitly say so if possible; otherwise it looks
like an ENOPATCH mistake.
--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com