PING: [PATCH] PR target/67215: -fno-plt needs improvements for x86

[Jeff Law]

On 10/28/2015 07:10 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> You didn't answer my question.
>>
>> I asked why you committed a patch given it didn't meet the  conditions Bernd
>> set forth for approval.  I didn't ask anything about the bug itself.
>>
>> So I'll ask again, why did you commit a patch which you clearly knew did not
>> meet the conditions Bernd set forth for approval?
>
> I believed that aarch64 backend didn't properly handle -fno-plt,
> which shouldn't block my patch.
Speaking strictly for myself at the moment...

--

You ought to know better than that.  A conditional approval was given, 
but your patch did not meet the conditions and thus it can not be 
considered approved.

At that point you could have *asked* if your patch could go forward, or 
worked with the AArch64 maintainers (who are very responsive) to reach a 
resolution and resubmitted a joint patch.

Instead you knowingly committed an unapproved patch.

Conditional approvals are a tool reviewers can use to help move patches 
along a little faster as are commit privileges.  Both rely on a level of 
trust that the reviewers and project as a whole extends to the 
contributor, namely that the contributor will only commit approved 
patches.  If a contributor can't be trusted to follow that rule, then 
we've got a serious problem.

--


Jeff