[llvm-dev] whatever happened to this patch?
David Blaikie via llvm-dev
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
Thu Apr 16 12:08:36 PDT 2020
On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 12:02 PM Chris Tetreault <ctetreau at quicinc.com>
> > you generally shouldn't approve patches if you aren't in a position to
> have committed the patch without review if it was your own patch
> I think this might be an overly high bar. Even the most complicated
> patches need to be approved by somebody. However I think few would argue
> that the most complicated patches should be committed by anybody without
Certainly - hence the "generally" and the other clauses in that sentence.
I'd describe that as sort of "cross-review" - perhaps "reaching consensus",
> *From:* llvm-dev <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> *On Behalf Of *David
> Blaikie via llvm-dev
> *Sent:* Wednesday, April 15, 2020 1:52 PM
> *To:* Andrew Kelley <andrew at ziglang.org>
> *Cc:* LLVM Dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
> *Subject:* [EXT] Re: [llvm-dev] whatever happened to this patch?
> Generally an author should submit an approved patch. If they do not have
> commit access they should ask someone who does (usually the approver) to
> commit it on their behalf.
> (you generally shouldn't approve patches if you aren't in a position to
> have committed the patch without review if it was your own patch - so at
> the very least having commit access, but also being sufficiently familiar
> with the norms of the part of the project that you're confident committing
> without review (this doesn't fully cover all cases, some areas do more
> cross-review than others, etc))
> On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 1:44 PM Andrew Kelley via llvm-dev <
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> It looks like it never got merged, what was the missing step to get this
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the llvm-dev