Not actually sending patches (was: [patch, fortran] [4.6 Regression] PR47853 Inquire affected by previous read)

[Steve Kargl]

On Wed, Feb 09, 2011 at 07:26:04AM +0100, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> Hello Jerry, all,
> 
> * Jerry DeLisle wrote on Wed, Feb 09, 2011 at 07:10:32AM CET:
> > Committed under simple rule.
> > 
> > Sending        ChangeLog
> > Sending        io.c
> > Transmitting file data ..
> > Committed revision 169961.
> > 
> > Regression tested on X86-64.
> 
> > 2011-02-08  Jerry DeLisle  <jvdelisle@gcc.gnu.org>
> > 
> > 	* io.c (match_io_element): Do not set dt if not inquire.
> 
> Your mail does not contain the actual change that you applied.
> It looks like this is becoming a trend, and I think it needs to stop.
> 
> The gcc-patches mailing list is read by an estimated 300+ people.  Most
> of them have very little time, but many of them are quickly able to
> point out that missing set of parentheses, that typo, or that unportable
> construct you may have used in your inline posted patch.  Not reading a
> patch that doesn't interest them maybe costs them three seconds.
> 
> But going to SVN or git, or just gcc-cvs, and digging out the revision
> number just to read the patch, much less comment on it, easily takes
> more than a minute.  That means, most readers won't do it, unless the
> patch happens to really really interest them.
> 
> So please, save 300 people work by investing 10 seconds yourself and
> post the actual patch.  In turn you get something out too: better
> review.
> 

I think your email is a tad bit over the top here.  Yes,
there are 300+ people who read gcc-patches, and there
will be 299+ people who see a Fortran patch and simply 
delete it.

-- 
Steve