Re: which patches to review

David S. Miller
2002-04-23T05:49:47Z

[ I deleted this from my inbox by accident so I'm replying
to it by hand... sorry. ]

Elena Zannoni said:

could I suggest you post a list of pointers to your pending
patches?

Ok, but I thought sending emails with "RFA" in the subject to
this list was sufficient to say which patches I want reviewed?
RFA means "request for approval", you can simply scan the GDB
list archives for every posting I made starting with RFA in
the subject, and if nobody has replied to it yet it means its
still pending.

I'm sending in a lot of changes, true. But what really eats me is
that everyone besides me sticks to one of two things in order to
actually get work done with GDB:

1) Become maintainer, so you can just post patches to the target
you maintain and you don't need to wait for review before
installation.

2) Stick to "obvious" fixes and therefore can just check them in.

All day long these people get to install their fixes, yet their work
is not necessarily easier to review nor the changes more obviously
correct than mine. Yet I am the one with a 30 patch backlog at this
point farting in my chair waiting for patches to be review before I
can work on new things. 30 patches basically means I maintain 30
checked out source trees waiting for approval so that I avoid
dependency problems.

And now I'm being told that I have to periodically post some kind
of "scoreboard" indicating what I want reviewed.

I'm spending all of my time in patch mangement, going above and beyond
what I really should have to do to get fixes installed (especially the
easier ones). That is my main point.

However, since my goal is to work with people and get the fixes
installed, I will be more mindful in the future of people's schedules
and the time they are able to contribute to GDB patch review. How
does that sound?

Anyways, back to the original question, the probably highest priority
(read as: one that causes the most dependencies for other changes I
want to submit) is this one:

http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2002-04/msg00710.html

Which by the "multi-arch" rule I though I could install but Andrew
forced me to revert the changes until "sparc developers" (note the
plural) make some commentary. As far as I am aware this means Michael
Snyder, which is just one person :-)