This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: gcc's obvious patch policy
- From: kenner at vlsi1 dot ultra dot nyu dot edu (Richard Kenner)
- To: amodra at gmail dot com
- Cc: dewar at adacore dot com, dje dot gcc at gmail dot com, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, mikestump at comcast dot net, stevenb dot gcc at gmail dot com
- Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 20:52:17 EST
- Subject: Re: gcc's obvious patch policy
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20131120090429 dot GT30563 at lug-owl dot de> <CABu31nOxDcuTvsGVU6YrLmd_ZEkuon8hiUNMoPk466F5WAkOGA at mail dot gmail dot com> <20131126051718 dot GQ3588 at bubble dot grove dot modra dot org> <CABu31nN60SQyQmmMW1g4hh3s65eEfdgtxZO85FisoZYjvfxjCQ at mail dot gmail dot com> <20131126102146 dot GA9211 at bubble dot grove dot modra dot org> <CAGWvnykdxn_e2rUgv2J5=arwRopijw5UB9XTKpP04bVb6guD7g at mail dot gmail dot com> <5295190A dot 4070205 at adacore dot com> <20131127014503 dot GG9211 at bubble dot grove dot modra dot org>
> The thing about written policy is that it sets the tone for a project.
> A restrictive policy tends to authoritarian rule by maintainers, it
> seems to me.
And a too little restrictive policy runs the risk of creating a
feeling that the rules aren't necessarily to be taken too seriously.
Neither outcome is good.