Re: [Gdbheads] A small patch case study, -file-list-exec-source-files

Bob Rossi
2004-03-25T14:21:06Z

On Wed, Mar 24, 2004 at 11:58:58PM -0800, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> > If you feel that your contributions are reviewed in reasonable time,
> > _you_ don't need to complain or ask for better response times.
> >
> > But other contributors felt differently. We didn't just invent that,
> > there are threads in the archives that show that this did in fact
> > happen. As long as any of the people who contribute code feel that
> > some of their contributions take too long to review, we as maintainers
> > need to do some soul searching to find ways to avoid such feelings.
>
> Right. I guess I wasn't clear in my previous message, sorry. I am not
> saying that everything is fine. I am just reacting to the idea of
> forcing maintainers to review within a hard timeframe each patch that
> touches some code they maintain. At least that's what I understood from
> Bob's message.

Please don't get me wrong. I don't think there should be a hard time
limit. I was just hoping to spark some interest in the community over
the example I am having with submitting a small patch.

Honestly, since the patch didn't make 6.1, I probably won't even start
integrating the functionality into CGDB for several months. So getting
this particular patch reviewed "quick" is not even an issue to me.
However, if I was to start contributing to GDB on a regular basis, and
patches took this long to review, I would probably find other things of
interest to work on.

> That's why I was in favor of the proposal that asked that global
> maintainers be allowed to review and approve patches anywhere.
> GCC does it, AFAIK. I think this is going to help GDB in that
> respect. Or does anybody have any evidence of the contrary?

With my limited knowledge it seems like that would be a good idea. I
wonder if anyone thinks it is a bad idea?

Bob Rossi