This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: gcc's obvious patch policy
- From: Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at adacore dot com>
- To: "Iyer, Balaji V" <balaji dot v dot iyer at intel dot com>
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, Diego Novillo <dnovillo at google dot com>, Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>, Steven Bosscher <stevenb dot gcc at gmail dot com>
- Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 18:33:08 +0100
- Subject: Re: gcc's obvious patch policy
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20131120090429 dot GT30563 at lug-owl dot de> <5294CCB0 dot 7010706 at redhat dot com> <BF230D13CA30DD48930C31D4099330003A4AC8D2 at FMSMSX101 dot amr dot corp dot intel dot com>
> Can I make a suggestion that if someone is making an "obvious" change (with
> the exception of changing non-working code (comments, things inside #if 0,
> etc)), have a patch on the mailing list for 12-24 hrs. before putting it
> in? Maybe they could say something like, I will check this in by X time
> <TIMEZONE> tomorrow since this looks obvious to me. This way if the change
> hurts someone who is working on a feature in their local machine that is
> using the existing framework can chime in.
I disagree, obvious patches cannot reasonably invalidate the work of others,
or else they are simply not obvious. At worst they can privatize a public
function or remove an unused one, but then it's easy to undo that later.
--
Eric Botcazou