Re: [RFC] Contributing tree-ssa to mainline

[law at redhat dot com]

In message <200401171704.i0HH4WWn015521@caip.rutgers.edu>, "Kaveh R. Ghazi" wri
tes:
 >However I'd like to hear the perspective of our release manager as
 >well as that of some of our global write maintainers who haven't been
 >immersed in the branch and haven't yet spoken up before we pull the
 >trigger on this.
Most definitely.  

What I really want to get out of this discussion is what we as a group
think the criteria for merging ought to be.  We can look at a number of
different things, including but not limited to design and code reviews,
compile and runtime benchmarking, regression testing across a wide
range of platforms, front-end issues (Ada/g77), etc etc.

I realize we already have some policies regarding merges from branches
into the mainline.  What I'm not clear on is whether or not we need to
have a more rigorous set of policies for tree-ssa.

I don't necessarily want to rehash every design decision made by the
group, but I do believe that the tree-ssa developers must be able to
justify their design decisions to the larger developer community.

Similarly, I believe that code reviews are important and valuable.  While
we certainly can't force folks to review the code, if folks are willing
to review, then the tree-ssa developers ought to embrace that feedback
and "do the right thing" based on that feedback.  A code review is certainly
made more valuable if the reviewer has the design background.



I guess at the root of my concerns is that while a number of the tree-ssa
developers technically have the ability to approve a merge to the mainline
(assuming we meet the published criteria), I'm not sure that's necessarily
the right thing to do in this case.  And if it's not the right thing to do,
then what is the right course of action?  Those are the questions I want to
see us hash through.

jeff