This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Patch commit requirements
- To: "Joseph S. Myers" <jsm28 at cam dot ac dot uk>
- Subject: Re: Patch commit requirements
- From: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
- Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2001 14:58:21 -0700
- cc: Geoff Keating <geoffk at redhat dot com>, "gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, "jh at suse dot cz" <jh at suse dot cz>, "amylaar at redhat dot com" <amylaar at redhat dot com>, "law at cygnus dot com" <law at cygnus dot com>
> Could this policy allow reversion of patches that add undocumented
> options, target macros, etc., as well?
People should never approve such patches. That's a little different
from regressions: things might work fun on Solaris but fail on HPUX,
say.
In general, I don't think reverting a patch for missing docs makes
sense right away. My proposal was to allow 48 hours for defects to
be corrected, on the mainline, and I think that's appropriate here, too.
After that point, we could consider it.
--
Mark Mitchell mark@codesourcery.com
CodeSourcery, LLC http://www.codesourcery.com