Reduce Dwarf Debug Size

Tom Tromey
Fri Mar 2 21:00:00 GMT 2007

>>>>> "Mike" == Mike Stump <> writes:

Mike> Yes, that we all can agree on that.
Mike> patches/list also suggests that it can also take a year and never get
Mike> a single review.

Some of this, though, is just the problem of having too few
maintainers for some areas.  E.g., there is no active libcpp
maintainer.  Instead libcpp patches wait for Mark to have a few spare
moments to do a review.  I'm sure the more complicated libcpp patches
suffer for this... but it seems unlikely to me that post-commit review
would help this.  In fact, it may make it worse, since I'd imagine
many patches would simply go without a review.  This, I fear, would
lead to directionless maintenance.

Mike> Why exclude them, let's insist they have to have their patches
Mike> reviewed as well, in fact, we can insist on a fifo for reviews, that
Mike> would ensure that the upper bound on reviews isn't 2 years.

Yeah, universal patch review is a good idea IMO.  But that may make
things even worse :-(


More information about the Gcc-patches mailing list