This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
RE: Patch queue and reviewing (Was Re: Generator programs can only be built with optimization enabled?)
- From: "Dave Korn" <dave dot korn at artimi dot com>
- To: "'Joe Buck'" <Joe dot Buck at synopsys dot COM>, "'Diego Novillo'" <dnovillo at redhat dot com>
- Cc: 'Manuel López-Ibáñez' <lopezibanez at gmail dot com>, "'Mike Stump'" <mrs at apple dot com>, "'Daniel Berlin'" <dberlin at dberlin dot org>, "'Eric Botcazou'" <ebotcazou at libertysurf dot fr>, "'Paolo Bonzini'" <paolo dot bonzini at lu dot unisi dot ch>, <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, "'Mark Mitchell'" <mark at codesourcery dot com>, "'GCC Patches'" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 18:15:19 +0100
- Subject: RE: Patch queue and reviewing (Was Re: Generator programs can only be built with optimization enabled?)
On 15 June 2006 18:09, Joe Buck wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 15, 2006 at 01:03:17PM -0400, Diego Novillo wrote:
>> Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote on 06/15/06 05:34:
>>> I mean, there is a patch queue, you put your patch or patch
>>> set in the queue, it gets bootstrapped and tested as you said on 2-5
>>> patforms, then either it passes and a notification is send to the
>> Actually, the patch queue only stores the patches. This idea of
>> bootstrapping on 2-5 platforms automatically has not been implemented.
> Right, but Manuel was commenting on Mike Stump's proposal, wondering
> why Mike proposed to run the bootstrap tests *after* reviewer approval
> instead of before.
Well, running them before and short-circuiting the review would be an
*optimisation*; those come later, after the /design/ stage!
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....