From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 100642 invoked by alias); 14 Oct 2019 18:02:17 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 100633 invoked by uid 89); 14 Oct 2019 18:02:16 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 spammy=meet X-HELO: mail-qk1-f196.google.com Received: from mail-qk1-f196.google.com (HELO mail-qk1-f196.google.com) (209.85.222.196) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Mon, 14 Oct 2019 18:02:15 +0000 Received: by mail-qk1-f196.google.com with SMTP id z67so16646888qkb.12 for ; Mon, 14 Oct 2019 11:02:14 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=XJq/bo9B/lsHS7hKprAu+lPf11MmLI+0Mbu8EwYN51k=; b=sZdccsR9Gg+38sffrmz2lneza9F5/GecBhFqUf/3DRzET8rPmYgzopyLvWS52Cd8/k T48t2kXISsZcL2E5ioGCQ2YJoxt9avvQFV9OudTJE1SlVsLPFcd0lFVasdQ8W3AL0RRH Pi7o+E/pBfYqc4nBiw56u2vshXDNTJSMmg5OB+BOZ2XEPMkRFSzfnEV9H4xV9Ez3Cfqi IU96d5qKWhCjyyo+ctIs7S9YBCPeNspWJu8SsYF/ANMa8cguLPO4o60TH0A8xpDwgKkV xcc72oEXLVXVWqHWbwzuSFLUOw3sqM8ziR6nrDW/Re1FqjK7t/H1BMuUY5KdSEQblPlX GS3g== Return-Path: Received: from [192.168.15.21] (201-42-175-128.dsl.telesp.net.br. [201.42.175.128]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d23sm9310893qkc.127.2019.10.14.11.02.09 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 14 Oct 2019 11:02:11 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH] gdb: remove unused includes from dwarf2read.c To: Eli Zaretskii , Simon Marchi Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20191013045218.3261363-1-simon.marchi@polymtl.ca> <1c1f820fa507243fd7a2096ec3eb2454@polymtl.ca> <83r23fie80.fsf@gnu.org> From: Luis Machado Message-ID: <2fc75879-f6a5-bb6a-afc5-dc1477375147@linaro.org> Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2019 18:02:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <83r23fie80.fsf@gnu.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2019-10/txt/msg00378.txt.bz2 On 10/14/19 11:38 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2019 10:21:50 -0400 >> From: Simon Marchi >> >> I pushed it after Tom de Vries reviewed it on Gerrit: >> >> https://gnutoolchain-gerrit.osci.io/r/c/binutils-gdb/+/24 > > Does this mean that now we need to look for patches in two places? > Can Gerrit be set up to forward the review comments to the list? > > Also, if some of us decides to do the review on Gerrit, does it mean > all the others need to do that as well? > The transition to some better (restrictions may apply) patch reviewing system is a good thing, but i agree we should think further about it. Personally i think we should discuss and then decide on a date by which we will fully transition to it. Otherwise there is the potential for confusion since people will have to look into two different places for patches. People may review stuff on gerrit and the mailing list at the same time. This split isn't great and is prone to cause collision of suggestions due to reviewers not being aware of each other. etc. Ideally we'd put gerrit up when it is fully configured and functional, being able to merge patches automatically. Then only maintainers will be able to +2 (approve) patches and verify contributors meet the legal requisites as is already the case with mailing lists?