This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: To Steering Committee: RFC for patch revert policy (PR48403, bootstrap broken on many targets)
- From: Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>
- To: Bernd Schmidt <bernds at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: Ian Lance Taylor <iant at google dot com>, Steven Bosscher <stevenb dot gcc at gmail dot com>, GCC Mailing List <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, David Edelsohn <dje at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Benjamin Kosnik <bkoz at redhat dot com>, "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>
- Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2011 20:30:05 -0600
- Subject: Re: To Steering Committee: RFC for patch revert policy (PR48403, bootstrap broken on many targets)
- References: <BANLkTi=AgWe2QOQ=bZ+a1XT7YQ1J1YKtyw@mail.gmail.com> <mcr1v1hfx5i.fsf@google.com> <4D9A6CDA.6080203@codesourcery.com>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 04/04/11 19:14, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
>>
> Another danger is getting a mob effect as in PR48403 (which I've also
> seen happen on other occasions) and getting the wrong set of patches
> reverted by trigger-happy people. To be blunt, there are some people on
> this list who tend to react panicky to bugs and skip proper analysis (as
> in this case); I don't want to encourage such folks to revert stuff
> willy-nilly. Sometimes you just need a bit of time and assistance from
> testers who actually see the problem to understand it.
>
> If there's a change in policy I'd at least make allowances for weekends.
> There's considerably less traffic on the mailing lists on Saturdays and
> Sundays, which suggests few people will be inconvenienced if the tree is
> broken during such a time. We also don't want everyone to only check
> things in on Mondays because they worry they'll come back after a
> weekend to find their stuff gone from the tree.
I definitely think that if there is a policy change that an allowance be
made for weekends/holidays and that if a patch has been identified and
the offender has acknowledged the issue and is actively working on the
problem give the offender time to resolve the issue.
jeff
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJNmn6tAAoJEBRtltQi2kC79OsIAJNEWxRmlCwrumS7cUkCQlDE
J8vq/KOj38O1pzSEpqjGWMGHlykCw5s9HnxZl8aX7XRtnp4CqpM7/dG2Gw69WOHn
6HGgu+f7e8XegsiSDxZXT3H5c+obGVR6LaZFOY3I35UuMfp08FPH7F3of5Lgm7dA
UHH63gBvZ+bYl7DKQ8q1FY8He8qBKpwvYAzFKiK2oUGxye1bIaXh7FXnWc7QVKyN
w7MTsnIcG/Beaqv5U5SxNs2SK6zDsJuQbdWDR0C0oFDFQHAyC7h73boHdjnkuyHb
g0w08QuDM2TWy6zMaz4rsBi39D6Q0+efZTPjdh0sDqvVaoTrcN/voIlW29d7MK0=
=kcu3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----