------- Comment #31 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-02-10 22:21 ------- (In reply to comment #30) > (1) do you need a regtesting of the patch on 4.2 and OSX 10.4? > Will 4.2.0 20070124 good enough or should I upgrade to a more > recent version?
It's OK. The change is simple and that part of code (this part of the powerpc backend) hasn't changed for a long time. >> (2) Patches in PR tend to not get reviewed, so we need people >> to post them to the list. > > Does this mean, that when I fill a PR, I should put > [EMAIL PROTECTED] in the cc list? No, otherwise the list will be flooded with bugzilla mail and we will all get lost reading through it. bugzilla PRs are fine because the itemize problems and gather the advances in the investigations in one central place. We don't want everyone's attention spreaded on all the problems, because that would be very inefficient: we want people to pick a task, and go for it, with help of a few others. But, when a patch is designed for a bug, then its needs to be reviewed by a maintainer of the relevant part of the compiler, and approved. This means, it needs to be posted to the gcc-patches mailing-list, because maintainers (although they go through the PRs every now and then) can't keep an eye on all of them. > (3) Can people like me post on [EMAIL PROTECTED] Anyone who has a patch that he wants reviewed can post it on gcc-patches. Usually, one posts patches of one's own design, but not necessary (as long as the person who designed the patch agrees with it): it can help relieve people who created the patch of some of the administrative burden, like the regtesting. You'll note there are certain contraints on patch submission, to make sure we keep a certain standard in patches and don't waste reviewers' time. Building, regtesting, adding testcases and ChangeLog entries is part of that. You can read a few gcc-patches discussions on the web archives to get a better idea of how it works. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30406
