From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cc-smtpout3.netcologne.de (cc-smtpout3.netcologne.de [IPv6:2001:4dd0:100:1062:25:2:0:3]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BDF863857C6F for ; Wed, 30 Dec 2020 09:52:51 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org BDF863857C6F Received: from cc-smtpin1.netcologne.de (cc-smtpin1.netcologne.de [89.1.8.201]) by cc-smtpout3.netcologne.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id E952D125A7 for ; Wed, 30 Dec 2020 10:52:48 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cc-smtpin1.netcologne.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id E621511E53 for ; Wed, 30 Dec 2020 10:52:48 +0100 (CET) Received: from [2001:4dd7:542b:0:97c4:7327:973b:657] (helo=cc-smtpin1.netcologne.de) by localhost with ESMTP (eXpurgate 4.11.6) (envelope-from ) id 5fec4df0-02f5-7f0000012729-7f000001b75e-1 for ; Wed, 30 Dec 2020 10:52:48 +0100 Received: from linux-p51k.fritz.box (2001-4dd7-542b-0-97c4-7327-973b-657.ipv6dyn.netcologne.de [IPv6:2001:4dd7:542b:0:97c4:7327:973b:657]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by cc-smtpin1.netcologne.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA for ; Wed, 30 Dec 2020 10:52:48 +0100 (CET) Subject: Re: Backports of foreign patches? To: "fortran@gcc.gnu.org" References: From: Thomas Koenig Message-ID: <5bc3cdf7-db6e-85d2-cf86-a16fa1756f2e@netcologne.de> Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2020 10:52:48 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: de-DE Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, NICE_REPLY_A, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: fortran@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Fortran mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2020 09:52:53 -0000 Hi Harald, What I'm writing below is my personal opinion, if anybody feels differently, please chime in. > just a hypothetical question: assume that some patch for a regression was > applied only to e.g. master some time ago but might be worth a backport, > the regression was indicated in the PR, and the patch author does not answer > any related queries in the PR? > > How could/should/would one proceed? > > Would it be acceptable to backport the patch after a sufficient waiting time > (at least e.g. one or two months)? I would say yes. Using "git gcc-backport" automatically credits the original author, so that's OK. Regarding the time frame, it probably makes sense to backport before the next release of that particular branch. That is, if it does apply cleanly. If there is some work needed that exceeds being cosmetic, then this would in effect be a new patch, which would require review. > With a notification to the ML? Not needed if it applies cleanly. > Or does > it require an additional OK from a reviewer? Only if it is a substantial rewrite (see above). > Or would one pass an invisible red line? Certainly not for me - I would feel bad about not reacting in the first place, but not about somebody backporting one of my patches. Best regards Thomas