This is the mail archive of the
fortran@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GNU Fortran project.
Re: [RFC] Question on gfortran extension
- From: Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gmail dot com>
- To: Steve Kargl <sgk at troutmask dot apl dot washington dot edu>
- Cc: Brooks Moses <brooks dot moses at codesourcery dot com>, fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2006 11:30:19 -0800
- Subject: Re: [RFC] Question on gfortran extension
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:subject:to:cc:in-reply-to:references:content-type:date:message-id:mime-version:x-mailer:content-transfer-encoding:from; b=CCbxPrjkTxBfLKbB8StmA7LgVO3MtNkehM97tbqdk9CL6Y4F2XmJlGc93LDGhmuIaosX4RNcKpwfNAHVqFaoxl12wXfloBN70OBrN6WGm5bf33Ke0/cdZDRiVJIe97Uu+NtMRYXkLn9lOJ9onKiytNQyot5iDwpQUA24B5pBn2Q=
- References: <455EA65C.1020505@verizon.net> <20061118065606.GA67520@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <455EB9C2.5000602@codesourcery.com> <20061118190359.GA71989@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
On Sat, 2006-11-18 at 11:03 -0800, Steve Kargl wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 17, 2006 at 11:44:02PM -0800, Brooks Moses wrote:
> >
> > P.S. Someone go review Steve's -fboz-kind patch, please! I looked over
> > it pretty thoroughly and it looks ok to me, but I can't approve it.
> >
>
> Actually, you may be eligible to review patches for inclusion
> in the source tree. See David Edelsohn's email concerning a
> recent SC decision.
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2006-11/msg00582.html
>
> We have the following people listed in MAINTAINERS as gfortran
> maintainers: Paul Brook, Thomas Koenig, Toon Moene, Jerry DeLisle,
> FX Coudert, Bud Davis, Steve Kargl, Paul Thomas, Tobi Schlueter,
> Erik Edelmann, and Janne Blomqvist. Currently, Paul Brook and Toon
> rarely review or submit fortran patches. Bud and Tobi have been
> on the sidelines due to real life obligation, but they still provide
> reviews when possible. It might take a week or two to get a review
> on a patch, but the remaining list of people do get around to
> checking over each others patches.
>
> In this new category of reviewers, I would placed Tobias Burnus,
> Brooks Moses, Asher Langton, and Daniel Franke. For now, I'd
> place Daniel in a documentation only reviewer category, but that
> can change. I may have forgotten someone, so don't be offended.
They have to be officially approved first by the SC.
-- Pinski