From: Yao Qi <qiyaoltc@gmail.com>
To: "Metzger, Markus T" <markus.t.metzger@intel.com>
Cc: "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>,
"palves@redhat.com" <palves@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] improve trace gap handling
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2016 15:04:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAH=s-PPMd24T1E5vKt2Zw3uZoF4AMNEurX7jE=fauxM_DRcr0Q@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <A78C989F6D9628469189715575E55B233FFFBBE5@IRSMSX104.ger.corp.intel.com>
On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 1:39 PM, Metzger, Markus T
<markus.t.metzger@intel.com> wrote:
>
> Don't we want patches to be peer reviewed in general? Or are you
> saying that I can and should make changes to record-btrace without
> review?
No, I am not saying that... :-) Peer review is always welcome. As we
said in MAINTAINERS:
"All maintainers are encouraged to post major patches to the gdb-patches
mailing list for comments, even if they have the authority to commit the
patch without review from another maintainer."
You, as a "responsible maintainer" for btrace, can/should review all
patches in the area of btrace, including patches written by yourself.
I think all these rules are of a purpose of having a healthy code base
with an efficient way. It helps nothing to block patches for three
months due to lack of peer review.
You must post your patches for review, and you have the authority
to approve the btrace bits. You can leave your patches for a period
of time, one week for example, in mail list to collect comments and
objections.
--
Yao (齐尧)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-10-27 15:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-07-22 8:12 Markus Metzger
2016-07-22 8:12 ` [PATCH 2/5] btrace: allow leading trace gaps Markus Metzger
2016-07-22 8:12 ` [PATCH 3/5] btrace: update tail call heuristic Markus Metzger
2016-07-22 8:12 ` [PATCH 5/5] btrace: bridge gaps Markus Metzger
2016-07-22 8:12 ` [PATCH 4/5] btrace: preserve function level for unexpected returns Markus Metzger
2016-10-27 10:59 ` [PATCH 0/5] improve trace gap handling Yao Qi
2016-10-27 12:39 ` Metzger, Markus T
2016-10-27 15:04 ` Yao Qi [this message]
2016-10-27 15:11 ` Pedro Alves
2016-10-28 7:11 ` Metzger, Markus T
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='CAH=s-PPMd24T1E5vKt2Zw3uZoF4AMNEurX7jE=fauxM_DRcr0Q@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=qiyaoltc@gmail.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=markus.t.metzger@intel.com \
--cc=palves@redhat.com \
/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