From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20740 invoked by alias); 29 Apr 2014 18:58:19 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 20728 invoked by uid 89); 29 Apr 2014 18:58:19 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,URIBL_SBL autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Tue, 29 Apr 2014 18:58:17 +0000 Received: from int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.24]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s3TIw2EY007128 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 29 Apr 2014 14:58:02 -0400 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s3TIw0fb004009; Tue, 29 Apr 2014 14:58:01 -0400 Message-ID: <535FF637.1080405@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2014 19:33:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130625 Thunderbird/17.0.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tom Tromey CC: Joel Brobecker , Gary Benson , Stan Shebs , gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Patchwork patch tracking system References: <20140402100842.GA956@blade.nx> <533F3713.40700@earthlink.net> <20140417135040.GA891@blade.nx> <20140422130652.GG5790@adacore.com> <8738gw6p4b.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <8738gw6p4b.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2014-04/txt/msg00084.txt.bz2 On 04/29/2014 06:07 PM, Tom Tromey wrote: > I've been trying the patchworks install as well. I don't find it all > that useful myself, but maybe it would be better if more people were > using it. I've been trying it out too. I've already found it useful to keep track of which of my own patches I have pending. I've been absent a little while from review, but I'm heading back, and I'm using patchwork to guide me. I like that it doesn't make the mailing list a second class citizen. I'd be willing to continue giving it a try, but indeed I think it'd be better if more people were using it. That'll be true for any tool we end up with. In the past week, I've been cleaning it up whenever I see that patches have been pushed, even those that I didn't approve myself, but of course it'd be better if who approves the patch or the submitter themselves take care of their own patches. non-maintainers shouldn't hold back from creating an account and updating the state of their own patches. Whatever helps bringing the load down from maintainers should help your own patches. :-) Here's the current list of who-has-how-many-pending: $ ~/bin/pwclient-hacked list -s New | sort | uniq -c | sort -nr 35 Andy Wingo 24 Andreas Arnez 20 Yao Qi 17 Jan Kratochvil 16 Pedro Alves 14 Siva Chandra 13 Keith Seitz 13 David Blaikie 12 Andrew Burgess 9 Doug Evans 4 Kyle McMartin 4 Hui Zhu 3 Simon Marchi 3 Eli Zaretskii 3 Alan Modra 2 Ulrich Weigand 2 Mike Frysinger 2 Doug Evans 2 Alexander Smundak 2 Agovic, Sanimir 1 Vladimir Nikulichev 1 Tom Tromey 1 Sandra Loosemore 1 Pierre Langlois 1 Nick Clifton 1 Mateusz Tabaka <8tab@wp.pl> 1 Mark Wielaard 1 Marcus Shawcroft 1 Marc Khouzam 1 Maciej W. Rozycki 1 Julian Brown 1 John Marino 1 Gary Benson 1 David Taylor 1 Daniel Gutson As you see, most of the patches so far, since we began tracking a few weeks back, came from a small set of people. And I suspect many of those are actually already in. -- Pedro Alves