I wanted to open a discussion about the policy regarding patch submission. LLVM, and most of its other subprojects, have adopted a policy of making small, incremental changes, as outlined here [ http://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#making-a-major-change]. It seems that either we don't have this on LLDB, or we do have it and it's just not enforced.
I personally have a strong preference for the incremental approach. All the reasons are outlined at the above link, so I don't think I need to repeat them. Is it possible to move towards this model with LLDB? Additionally, I frequently see patches going in without review. What is LLDB's policy on this? Are we're ok with having broken code upstreamed for a short time on the condition that the committer is acting in good faith to fix it as soon as possible? For example, I've had a patch up for 6 days that I've pinged on a couple of times, with no traction. I've been waiting because I was under the impression that getting a review was a requirement. But sometimes I see patches that seem non-trivial getting pushed straight to the server without any kind of review. So I'm not sure if my understanding is correct. Either way, some clarification woudl be nice. Thanks!
_______________________________________________ lldb-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
