This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Acceptance criteria for the git conversion
- From: "Eric S. Raymond" <esr at thyrsus dot com>
- To: David Malcolm <dmalcolm at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2015 21:01:24 -0400
- Subject: Re: Acceptance criteria for the git conversion
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20150901105414 dot GA30270 at thyrsus dot com> <alpine dot DEB dot 2 dot 10 dot 1509011245480 dot 11400 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <20150901153036 dot GA1223 at thyrsus dot com> <1441153958 dot 9002 dot 63 dot camel at surprise>
- Reply-to: esr at thyrsus dot com
David Malcolm <dmalcolm@redhat.com>:
> > Still, if anyone else is brave enough to write a script that will munch
> > through gcc-patches producing committer/date/subject-line triples, I'll
> > give it a try.
>
> I don't think committer/date/subject-line triples are adequate: the
> dates are unlikely to match up, for one thing.
Agreed. They're unlikely to match up exactly.
> I think such a solution would need to somehow locate and match patches
> themselves.
>
> I was feeling brave, so I had a go at writing a scraper; see:
> https://github.com/davidmalcolm/patch-finder
> for what I have so far (tested with Python 2.7).
>
> This can scrape the gcc-patches archives and locate mails containing
> patches, extracting the patches (some of them anyway...). The idea
> would be to stuff the patches into some kind of big data store, and
> somehow them try to locate them (perhaps within a rough date "window").
>
> Does this seem like a viable approach?
I think it's as good as we're likely to get given the data available.
--
<a href="http://www.catb.org/~esr/";>Eric S. Raymond</a>