From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25759 invoked by alias); 16 Apr 2012 14:42:30 -0000 Received: (qmail 25673 invoked by uid 22791); 16 Apr 2012 14:42:29 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_THREADED X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from hagrid.ecoscentric.com (HELO mail.ecoscentric.com) (212.13.207.197) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 16 Apr 2012 14:42:11 +0000 Received: from localhost (hagrid.ecoscentric.com [127.0.0.1]) by mail.ecoscentric.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D0D72F78009 for ; Mon, 16 Apr 2012 15:42:10 +0100 (BST) Received: from mail.ecoscentric.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (hagrid.ecoscentric.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IU+fqot2FYz7; Mon, 16 Apr 2012 15:42:08 +0100 (BST) From: bugzilla-daemon@bugs.ecos.sourceware.org To: ecos-patches@ecos.sourceware.org Subject: [Bug 1001550] STM32 F2 and STM3220G-EVAL / STM3240G-EVAL contribution from eCosCentric X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: eCos X-Bugzilla-Component: Patches and contributions X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement X-Bugzilla-Who: jifl@ecoscentric.com X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED X-Bugzilla-Priority: low X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: jifl@ecoscentric.com X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: In-Reply-To: References: X-Bugzilla-URL: http://bugs.ecos.sourceware.org/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2012 14:42:00 -0000 Message-Id: <20120416144208.CD8A42F78001@mail.ecoscentric.com> Mailing-List: contact ecos-patches-help@ecos.sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: ecos-patches-owner@ecos.sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2012-04/txt/msg00045.txt.bz2 Please do not reply to this email. Use the web interface provided at: http://bugs.ecos.sourceware.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1001550 --- Comment #32 from Jonathan Larmour 2012-04-16 15:42:05 BST --- [Ignore comment #31 which got submitted prematurely] (In reply to comment #30) > (In reply to comment #0) > > > I am committing this, but let me know in this bug about any issues in any of > > the patches, and I'll deal with them. > > Jifl, as a general point, can you give the other eCos maintainers an > opportunity to comment on patches of this size/significance before check-in > please? That isn't the way we've operated before, nor is it the way other FSF projects operate including GDB and GCC. Unless of course the changes are controversial or the maintainer has some uncertainty about them, or they extensively change core code. Not when the changes are within the maintainer's own area of competence anyway... for example, if I wanted to make non-trivial changes to the configtool, I would expect to put them through review certainly. Also with many substantial patches, it is sometimes much clearer to see what is going on by actually looking at the end result, not the diff, and IME having to apply (fixing up any bit-rot causing failed patches) and then revert all the patches locally is a pain and impedes review. The onus is naturally on the maintainer responsible to fix up any issues resulting responsively, which absolutely could result in the patch being reverted if needed. And that's the thing: we can always revert a patch if it turns out to be more controversial than intended. But in general I don't think we should be putting extra barriers in the way of improvements from any maintainers, and that applies to everyone, not just me. Jifl -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.ecos.sourceware.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.