[LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] !!! 3.2 Release branch patching and the Code Owners

[32bitmicro]

> Hi Pawel,
> 
>> I would like to merge r168035, r168181 and r168291 as
>> one reassociate changeset:
> 
> r168181 has nothing to do with reassociate, so should be separate. 
> r168035 and
> r168291 have no logical connection so I don't think they should be
> merged as one
> changeset.

Must have been lost in links somewhere :)

Anyway:

r168035
Committed revision 168446.
r168181
Committed revision 168447.

r168291
On hold awaiting approval.

> 
>> Have you heard from Chris regarding r168291?
>> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20121112/156364.html
>>
> 
> No, he didn't OK it yet.  Hopefully he will!
> 
> Ciao, Duncan.
> 
>>
>> Pawel
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On 20/11/12 05:57, Chris Lattner wrote:
>>>> Fwiw, I approve both of these patches if they are still unmerged.
>>> ...
>>>>> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20121112/155994.html
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20121112/156206.html
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks Chris.  Can you please also give your go ahead for this nasty
>>> reassociate
>>> infinite loop (PR14060):
>>>
>>> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20121112/156364.html
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Best wishes, Duncan.
>>>
>>>
>>
> 
> 
>