> -----Original Message----- > From: avr-gcc-list-bounces+eric.weddington=atmel....@nongnu.org > [mailto:avr-gcc-list-bounces+eric.weddington=atmel....@nongnu.org] On > Behalf Of Georg-Johann Lay > Sent: Friday, March 04, 2011 11:46 AM > To: David Brown > Cc: avr-gcc-list@nongnu.org > Subject: Re: [avr-gcc-list] Re: crosstool-NG > > > You have to go through the bureaucracy only once (signing FSF/GPL > stuff). As far as I can tell, getting patches into avr backend is no big > deal, at least for straight forward stuff (I did'n yet try to get more > elaborate stuff into avr). Even though GCC supports fair amount of > whatever, avr development takes place in a small (with respect to rest > of GCC) sandbox: the avr backend. Other parts of GCC are not affected by > the work in that sandbox and thus is no issue for maintainers other than > avr backend maintainers. > > Johann
I have to agree with Johann. The FSF copyright assignment only has to be done once, but if it can't be done then that is a big showstopper. The other main issue, that I see at least, are the testing requirements. Getting your (non-trivial) patch tested enough to have it committed takes just the right setup, and it can't be done on Windows (due to the usage of the dejagnu test system). The GCC regression test suite is big and takes a while to run. _______________________________________________ AVR-GCC-list mailing list AVR-GCC-list@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-gcc-list
