From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13905 invoked by alias); 23 Nov 2011 17:06:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 13870 invoked by uid 22791); 23 Nov 2011 17:06:47 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-7.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 23 Nov 2011 17:06:29 +0000 Received: from int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id pANH6R89022449 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 23 Nov 2011 12:06:27 -0500 Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id pANH6RYG002641; Wed, 23 Nov 2011 12:06:27 -0500 Received: from barimba (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id pANH6PRr032762; Wed, 23 Nov 2011 12:06:26 -0500 From: Tom Tromey To: Andrey Smirnov Cc: Mike Frysinger , gdb-patches Subject: Re: [PATCH 22/348] Fix -Wsahdow warnings References: <878vn88fw3.fsf@gmail.com> <4ECBA525.1010801@redhat.com> <201111221027.52484.vapier@gentoo.org> Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 17:06:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: (Andrey Smirnov's message of "Wed, 23 Nov 2011 11:29:41 +0600") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.90 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain 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 X-SW-Source: 2011-11/txt/msg00626.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Andrey" == Andrey Smirnov writes: Andrey> Initially, there were 17 patches, which, upon suggestion from Tom Andrey> Tromey, I split so that every patch contain only changes to one Andrey> particular function or some other small unit of the source code. I Andrey> tend to agree with Tom that my initial decision to make only 17 Andrey> patches made it rather hard to review each, because every one of them Andrey> contained many small but disparate changes. I didn't really mean for you to split it down this much, but now you've done it. I don't want to make too much extra work for you. Andrey> Squashing or splitting commits is not really a problem and I can do Andrey> this, but if you want me to do so, than please point out the patches Andrey> I should squash together. It is hard for us to do that without seeing the whole series :) Conversely maybe it is hard for you to know which patches are likely to be controversial and which are obvious. I think it is hard to discuss in the abstract. One idea would be for you to merge reasonably obvious patches together in a file-based way, using your best judgment about what "reasonably obvious" means. Or, we can just carry on. Andrey> So given the aforementioned amount of work, can't we ignore that the Andrey> patch count is over 9000? Not sure what this refers to. Tom