[LLVMdev] Compile error in include/Support/GraphWriter.h
Vikram S. Adve
vadve at cs.uiuc.edu
Mon Oct 28 07:01:01 PST 2002
I'll jump in just to repeat to all listeners what I suggested to Casey:
please send patches to Nick Hildenbrandt (hldnbrnd at uiuc.edu) and not to
llvmdev. I think Casey's right that individual patches are easier to
deal with, but Nick can apply patches and use his discretion about
notifying everyone if a fix seems worth broadcasting.
Of course, patches are very welcome. Casey's fixes have been invaluable
with the Linux port so, for the record, thanks!
> -----Original Message-----
> From: llvmdev-admin at cs.uiuc.edu
> [mailto:llvmdev-admin at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Bill? Wendling
> Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 12:50 AM
> To: Casey Carter
> Cc: LLVMdev List
> Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Compile error in include/Support/GraphWriter.h
> Also sprach Casey Carter:
> } Bill? Wendling wrote:
> } >Um...was it entirely necessary to issue *8* email messages
> to the group } >with mostly single-line fixes instead of just
> one email with all of the } >fixes and an explanation for
> each? } > } >
> } >
> } Actually, yes it was. Proper netiquette when submitting to
> a technical
> } list is to have a single topic per message. This makes it
> easy to track
> } issues individually, without the messiness that occurs from
> } several issues together in a single missive. One large
> email with a big
> } lump of diffs is much less clear, and takes substantially
> more effort to
> } parse: Are the patches independent? Which fix corresponds
> to which
> } problem?
> Since it's also proper netiquette not to spam too much, this
> will be the end of this thread for me.
> What you say is all true. However, the changes you made were
> very small (though necessary) and not really subject to the
> difficulties in parsing through them that you mentioned. Most
> consisted of single-line fixes (as I mentioned above), and a
> lot of them obvious fixes.
> } Being new to this group, I am simply acting as my
> experience dictates
> } and discussing these issues in the way I feel is best. If my
> } infamiliarity with the group causes me to occasionally act
> against what
> } is common practice here, I will appreciate it when you
> inform me that I
> } have done so and what the proper approach should be.
> I vote for simple/obvious fixes to be combined in one email.
> I may exist as a sole entity in feeling this way, but so be
> it. If others would like such fixes to be concatenated, feel
> free to pipe in. If, on the other hand, people feel that such
> fixes should be separated, then the consensus should win out.
> Keep in mind, I'm only suggesting this for simple/obvious
> fixes. Not for more complex ones which require more detailed
> descriptions and are more properly separated into multiple
> emails, IMHO.
> Democracy is fun :-)
> || Bill? Wendling wendling at isanbard.org
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
More information about the llvm-dev