change of such magnitude is just too much to handle by gatekeepers. Personally, I don't think this is the way to go to request for checkins. It amounts to just shoving to open64 community's throat through shear size and tight timing of your own making. I had serious design issue with one of your previous checkin and I don't even know what we are supposed to do with it. And now this. EOF Sun
2010/7/13 "C. Bergström" <cbergst...@pathscale.com>: > David Coakley wrote: >> I did not attach the changes since they are fairly large (~1.4M). >> Instead I attached the output of diffstat showing which files have >> changed -- not included in that output are a handful of new files in >> be/opt and osprey/libfi/mathlb. Gatekeepers: please let me know who >> will participate in the review/approval process and I will send the >> patch directly. Anyone else that is interested is welcome to take a >> look, too. > Can you upload a patch and put a link to it? > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > This SF.net email is sponsored by Sprint > What will you do first with EVO, the first 4G phone? > Visit sprint.com/first -- http://p.sf.net/sfu/sprint-com-first > _______________________________________________ > Open64-devel mailing list > Open64-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/open64-devel > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.net email is sponsored by Sprint What will you do first with EVO, the first 4G phone? Visit sprint.com/first -- http://p.sf.net/sfu/sprint-com-first _______________________________________________ Open64-devel mailing list Open64-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/open64-devel
