From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id IOqEOXeD8WaunzQAWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Mon, 23 Sep 2024 11:04:23 -0400 Authentication-Results: simark.ca; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; secure) header.d=sourceware.org header.i=@sourceware.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=default header.b=obq2Qdze; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id E4B291E353; Mon, 23 Sep 2024 11:04:23 -0400 (EDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 (2022-12-13) on simark.ca X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.1 required=5.0 tests=ARC_SIGNED,ARC_VALID,BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED,RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE,URIBL_BLOCKED,URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=4.0.0 Received: from server2.sourceware.org (server2.sourceware.org [8.43.85.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 162251E05C for ; Mon, 23 Sep 2024 11:04:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB2DA3858C78 for ; Mon, 23 Sep 2024 15:04:22 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org BB2DA3858C78 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1727103862; bh=xcd+wpDzrZT58xj0v/Z7du59BYZCIciUbU+hMzTsRxA=; h=Date:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe: From:Reply-To:From; b=obq2QdzehL6qADQXK/HQz7/ilQnGK9kyDeeDUijOOkO5BOSBeRox4mlzuINlBDbPd YFalsAatTnHuZGe2ftM8iJLMwu+yt4gCAJsLJXEcJEQ1iqvV1pKM5nYSXqjGaakmbe qmbLcMzaysdZNYhqf+xV5uiDpUDEYmkhs0ENb3Q0= Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC4AD385C6CA for ; Mon, 23 Sep 2024 15:03:29 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org DC4AD385C6CA ARC-Filter: OpenARC Filter v1.0.0 sourceware.org DC4AD385C6CA ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1727103812; cv=none; b=sYgqAlGVTAi6ZfDqTmo43Akb7523o+918KWsZ3xTga95go1gFhpMYi+gIuy3emERSZu9fDLaEX8o7NvB7FRAPWFBwS4HEWjQ5AH3zXo86lN0tseGc4bLhU3WJFkBAU55ZAg4LD1PdqPuoGLNdG/Bsxt6Si5u/uqz8XmNAg2ZR3w= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1727103812; c=relaxed/simple; bh=3kItbto6wATdbL9jM8s1CoaLUQF0brDZE++Bp1FzCs8=; h=DKIM-Signature:Date:From:To:Subject:Message-ID:MIME-Version; b=A3Eu3C5X8+ALfAwyHD+BLXtexV1aGudH6Z7og/xKemdvY3opOAkxF65v5d+5AiveRQN4NPp3yuONjoKe5J8A/5+acBkAYc0/wXMGlVRab3kAYV5F1G4XYMcgM0+xbjQ7ssFh2PfaPA6zGKG1yffoYXnJZDhzEH5eI4WB9NUOgMM= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; server2.sourceware.org Received: from mail-wm1-f71.google.com (mail-wm1-f71.google.com [209.85.128.71]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-58-jrggr1aNPFWhtBRv9rcefA-1; Mon, 23 Sep 2024 11:03:28 -0400 X-MC-Unique: jrggr1aNPFWhtBRv9rcefA-1 Received: by mail-wm1-f71.google.com with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-42cb08ed3a6so25577715e9.0 for ; Mon, 23 Sep 2024 08:03:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1727103807; x=1727708607; h=mime-version:references:message-id:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from :date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=xcd+wpDzrZT58xj0v/Z7du59BYZCIciUbU+hMzTsRxA=; b=ejXNbqR/48Wy61dxHNh03vmgd+p11VVExDbof57/3NyrRD8z7yCdMBvy8bT6H9YEQB PBoVNetLf3JnAXt9CTbW2v2qalZtcpQRP9DZe1R2f1bSjbHGbtISHmiudpu/Hbfh/ZYo pTnFWVdE3qtiiqJJ9Vo1QFq3cG4whCmwgU43WHR0q2DHkVfpCRYglpHRIb7O83/ScHCg 5FslgyKKd5LAcXPMykQfel63EL75RAG7T/4k3YG19D93h50CYSoqTUeKDaRUPdKn0gKU 0sg70BCufGGqO9AgVOC4LJMDfam8/SzJWr47siwktkvdxsj8quJ5zjYQwfnRSZNe+LZB wiKA== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCXWa4sQT4Xzkkc06UKMKGCcrvBToh6HHG0AZKv4/0IfgxuIW+imKMe5NjTZSJgsFOgxKtA=@sourceware.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzcH1+p8CiZwIlWeWBNcyuQqxd0gFVwqLxvE0+zunXrgIbgQwuO Gqcq5NYyTk16Hizm4myMlofRuvkUyFjeLvXwG2uTlUoFoTAvPbmhZ4zpKWx8mfVWrw8Ceo3uirP dHcS8zNr95p7dpNKAhg0U3wWfovHnBEundrHympT6JZ6Tvm5p X-Received: by 2002:a5d:5f87:0:b0:374:c1ea:2d40 with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-3799a1c5440mr11129112f8f.1.1727103807145; Mon, 23 Sep 2024 08:03:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IF46cB3XebvEf4IjE71d/GLy/mPlx5BmSGHjY3L7Tk3BBAsnQcPBLiG7KLQ1LTjZpbAMA6g3w== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:5f87:0:b0:374:c1ea:2d40 with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-3799a1c5440mr11129073f8f.1.1727103806738; Mon, 23 Sep 2024 08:03:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from digraph.polyomino.org.uk (digraph.polyomino.org.uk. [2001:8b0:bf73:93f7::51bb:e332]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 5b1f17b1804b1-42e7540e32fsm129879995e9.9.2024.09.23.08.03.26 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 23 Sep 2024 08:03:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jsm28 (helo=localhost) by digraph.polyomino.org.uk with local-esmtp (Exim 4.97) (envelope-from ) id 1sskay-0000000CkRX-2NWL; Mon, 23 Sep 2024 15:03:24 +0000 Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2024 15:03:24 +0000 (UTC) To: enh cc: Jonathan Wakely , Thomas Koenig , gcc@gcc.gnu.org, libc-alpha@sourceware.org, binutils@sourceware.org, gdb@sourceware.org, "fortran@gcc.gnu.org" Subject: Re: On pull request workflows for the GNU toolchain In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <68f584af-174c-05ba-7cac-d86c05c8f143@redhat.com> References: <55715cf9-0f6c-4525-a310-7945db72dc21@netcologne.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-BeenThere: gdb@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.30 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Joseph Myers via Gdb Reply-To: Joseph Myers Errors-To: gdb-bounces~public-inbox=simark.ca@sourceware.org Sender: "Gdb" On Mon, 23 Sep 2024, enh via Gcc wrote: > it doesn't make the patch _management_ problem better ("now i have two > problems"), but https://github.com/landley/toybox takes the "why not both?" > approach --- you can use pull requests if you grew up with/adapted to > git/github, or you can use the mailing list otherwise ... taking into > account that what the "barriers" are depend on whose eye's you're looking > through. My expectation is that such a split would need to work for an initial transitional period at least (for reviews of patches posted before the move to the forge software without requiring all such under-review patches to go into PRs if people want review, if nothing else). While I think there are advantages in terms of structured data if everything ends up using PRs (including people doing PRs that are immediately self-merged of changes in areas they maintain), it would be possible to do otherwise (at least until you get to wanting all merges to mainline to be done by a CI system that maintains a regression-free state for at least one configuration). -- Joseph S. Myers josmyers@redhat.com