[LLVMdev] code-owner sporks

dag at cray.com dag at cray.com
Fri Nov 16 14:18:13 PST 2012

Sean Silva <silvas at purdue.edu> writes:

>> Really, patches get dropped *all the time* to the point where pings are
>> a regular part of the development process.  That's a huge waste of time
>> for everyone.
> It's only a waste of time if your workflow is entirely synchronous
> with patch review. Most of us have a number of things that we can work
> on, so letting a patch chill for a while on the list isn't a big deal
> because we just go on and do something else.

Of course, that's easier with git.  :)

> Also, this situation has piqued my interest and so I am researching
> the issues involved. Could you give me some links (or thread titles)
> for dropped patches, so that I can take a look at them and try to
> puzzle out how the development process ended up in them being dropped?
> Nothing big, maybe 5 or so is probably enough. Thanks.

Really?  Ok...

Ping Request (couldn't find an actual review)

Ping Request (couldn't find an actual review)

Never reviewed?

Never reviewed?

Ping Request (looks like it got reviewed shortly after the ping)

Reviewed five days later (I think).

The mailing list interface makes it difficult to look for the things you
requested, but all of these examples occurred just last week.


More information about the llvm-dev mailing list