This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@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: CALL_EXPR representation changes coming; need patch reviewer(s)


On Feb 8, 2007, at 5:12 PM, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
The problem is if there are more conflicts introduced during the "build" period between "resolve conflicts" and "svn ci" -- especially if we add "test" after "build".

If you need a test cycle, by all means add one, but, if you add one, you can also add one more svn up and build post testing, just before ci if you are worried about:


If you're willing to accept that there may be a time period when I'm still cleaning up merge-related problems in checked-in code

An up-to-date incremental build is around 2 seconds on my machine, cheap enough to just do it. One can engineer it so that the time between the second to the last build and the last build is under five minutes. With that type of window for breakages, no one is gonna scream. If you put 48 hours between the two, well, then we might notice and scream.


When I read your first email, the first thought that jumped into my head was that you wanted to call for 72-hours of no checkins for mainline, and then my brain screamed noooooo. I re-read Mark's rules and your posting and concluded that my worst fear wasn't implied by what you said, though, it wasn't ruled out either. :-)


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