Commits to trunk and branch: maintainer's role?

Commits to trunk and branch: maintainer's role?

[Orjan Friberg]

Just committing a change to cris-tdep.c on the 5.1 branch, I noticed
that a couple of changes on the trunk by other people after the 5.1
branch was cut never made it to the branch.  Being new in the target
maintainer role, I'm wondering if those changes should have been made to
the branch also (if applicable for the branch of course), or if that is
the maintainer's role.

More specifically, these are the changes I'm thinking about.  At least
the first one seems branch material to me, the second I'm not sure of
since it deals with multi-arching.

revision 1.3
date: 2001/09/19 21:59:41;  author: cagney;  state: Exp;  lines: +2 -2
* cris-tdep.c (cris_get_signed_offset): Change return type to an
explicitly signed char.

revision 1.2
date: 2001/09/05 23:44:43;  author: ezannoni;  state: Exp;  lines: +1 -1
2001-09-05  Elena Zannoni  <ezannoni@redhat.com>

[snip]
        * cris-tdep.c (cris_delayed_get_disassembler): Use
        TARGET_PRINT_INSN, instead of tm_print_insn.


I'm grateful that other people fix these things, I'm just wondering
about the proper procedure for committing when there's an active branch.

-- 
Orjan Friberg              E-mail: orjan.friberg@axis.com
Axis Communications AB     Phone:  +46 46 272 17 68

Re: Commits to trunk and branch: maintainer's role?

[Andrew Cagney]

> Just committing a change to cris-tdep.c on the 5.1 branch, I noticed
> that a couple of changes on the trunk by other people after the 5.1
> branch was cut never made it to the branch.  Being new in the target
> maintainer role, I'm wondering if those changes should have been made to
> the branch also (if applicable for the branch of course), or if that is
> the maintainer's role.

For changes like the below, it would be up to you.  These changes 
weren't to fix a demonstrated bug but rather to address a potential 
coding problem.  In the case of the first, I noticed a -Werror problem, 
the second was part of multi-arching TARGET_PRINT_INSN.

As they say, if it ain't broke, don't fix it :-)

Andrew


> More specifically, these are the changes I'm thinking about.  At least
> the first one seems branch material to me, the second I'm not sure of
> since it deals with multi-arching.
> 
> revision 1.3
> date: 2001/09/19 21:59:41;  author: cagney;  state: Exp;  lines: +2 -2
> * cris-tdep.c (cris_get_signed_offset): Change return type to an
> explicitly signed char.

This
> revision 1.2
> date: 2001/09/05 23:44:43;  author: ezannoni;  state: Exp;  lines: +1 -1
> 2001-09-05  Elena Zannoni  <ezannoni@redhat.com>
> 
> [snip]
>         * cris-tdep.c (cris_delayed_get_disassembler): Use
>         TARGET_PRINT_INSN, instead of tm_print_insn.
> 
> 
> I'm grateful that other people fix these things, I'm just wondering
> about the proper procedure for committing when there's an active branch.
> 
>