This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: Tracking patch pings
- From: David Miller <davem at davemloft dot net>
- To: joseph at codesourcery dot com
- Cc: vapier at gentoo dot org, libc-alpha at sourceware dot org
- Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 14:53:15 -0700 (PDT)
- Subject: Re: Tracking patch pings
- References: <Pine dot LNX dot 4 dot 64 dot 1305152117141 dot 21321 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <201305151728 dot 04922 dot vapier at gentoo dot org> <Pine dot LNX dot 4 dot 64 dot 1305152134260 dot 21321 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk>
From: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph@codesourcery.com>
Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 21:41:21 +0000
> On Wed, 15 May 2013, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>
>> On Wednesday 15 May 2013 17:20:10 Joseph S. Myers wrote:
>> > To raise more visibly something I mentioned in another thread:
>> >
>> > Should we have some system for tracking patches that are pending review,
>> > especially those that have been pinged? For example, there could be a
>> > list on the wiki page for the current release cycle of patches believed to
>> > be ready for review and the contribution checklist could say to add your
>> > patch there when pinging it. (Ideally we'd have people who specifically
>> > try to keep a lookout for unreviewed patches and add them to the list
>> > after a week even if not pinged.)
>>
>> or use patchwork ?
>> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/
>>
>> looks like they're handling gcc-patches already. and they have the
>> infrastructure. all we have to do is ask them to turn it on and see how it
>> goes ? :)
>
> The GCC list has thousands of patches in it. To be useful someone would
> need to remove non-patches and reviewed patches promptly, to the extent it
> can't do that automatically.
Patchwork, as the web site several of us have given you the URL to
explains, knows what a patch looks like and does not track
non-patches.