From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz@gnu.org>
To: Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>
Cc: cagney@gnu.org, drow@false.org, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [commit] Add add_setshow_enum_cmd, use in mips
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 23:31:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <01c4c77c$Blat.v2.2.2$a7e52160@zahav.net.il> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200411102142.iAALgEPM095582@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> (message from Mark Kettenis on Wed, 10 Nov 2004 22:42:14 +0100 (CET))
> Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 22:42:14 +0100 (CET)
> From: Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>
> CC: cagney@gnu.org, drow@false.org, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
>
> Sorry, but I have to disagree here. For the (unfortunately) limited
> number of people that contribute several patches in a week this is a
> significant problem. When I'm working on a particular area I often
> find myself making multiple changes to the same file. If I have to
> post a patch and wait a week before I can check it in, I have two
> options:
>
> 1. Juggle with the patches for a week, risking an accidental commit of
> stuff belonging to a different patch to the same file, or dropping
> a patch completely in the process.
>
> 2. Postpone further work on that part of GDB until the week is over
> and the patch has been committed.
>
> Neither option is good for GDB.
That might be tough, but we all do precisely that when the file in
question is not in our maintainership area.
Mind you, I'm not suggesting that you should post an RFA in x86 files,
as you are the area maintainer for those. I'm talking about files for
which there's no area maintainer. The idea being that we are all
collectively responsible for such files, so the patch should be
approved collectively rather than unilaterally.
Yes, it slows down the development a bit, but I don't think the patch
rate is our most important goal. The rate is important, but code
quality and clean design are IMHO more important.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-11-10 23:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-10-30 17:11 Andrew Cagney
2004-10-30 23:24 ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-10-31 23:01 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-11-01 4:47 ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-11-01 5:12 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-11-01 21:15 ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-11-01 22:37 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-11-02 4:51 ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-11-09 1:15 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-11-09 5:00 ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-11-09 15:29 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-11-09 18:42 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-11-10 4:33 ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-11-10 20:55 ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-11-10 21:42 ` Mark Kettenis
2004-11-10 23:31 ` Eli Zaretskii [this message]
2004-11-10 23:41 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-11-11 0:00 ` Eli Zaretskii
2004-11-11 5:37 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-11-11 5:59 ` Joel Brobecker
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='01c4c77c$Blat.v2.2.2$a7e52160@zahav.net.il' \
--to=eliz@gnu.org \
--cc=cagney@gnu.org \
--cc=drow@false.org \
--cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox