From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22882 invoked by alias); 6 Jun 2007 11:23:13 -0000 Received: (qmail 22846 invoked by uid 48); 6 Jun 2007 11:23:01 -0000 Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2007 11:23:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20070606112301.22845.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug c++/29365] Unnecessary anonymous namespace warnings In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "manu at gcc dot gnu dot org" Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2007-06/txt/msg00380.txt.bz2 ------- Comment #29 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-06 11:23 ------- (In reply to comment #28) > (In reply to comment #27) > > > It is not like GCC is a closed source program either, > > you can try to make a fix for the issue too. > > Andrew, real world is not so simple ;) [snip] > c.a. 3 months and no effects for tested trivial patch. > no accecpt, no reject, no commit, no fun. > in current situation i feel no reason to working > on another patch while the GCC-Team redirect external > patches to /dev/null. It is true that patches get lost sometimes. But that is true for everybody, not only for external patches. If you check http://www.dberlin.org/patches/patches/list, there are patches pending since 2006 from top maintainers such as Andrew Pinski. I guess they forgot about them or just don't have time to keep pinging them. (That is why the patch tracker is such a great idea, I may decide to take his patch, update it and ping it myself). > moreover, gcc lists are full of patch-ping^N-noeffects. > i think people are not motivated to cooperate with GCC-Team. That may be true. (I think it is to some extent). But there are also lots of patches that get 5 pings and then get reviewed and committed. Sending a ping for a patch takes less than 1 second (at least with gmail). Sometimes you need to ping individual maintainers (CC them) one by one until someone replies (in your case, perhaps diagnostics maintainer and C++ front-end ones) but without being annoying because that will put reviewers off. Unfortunately, this penalises the sporadic contributor that wants to commit a patch before sending another. You don't need to wait. If you have 12 patches waiting approval, ping all of them. (It will make more noise than a lonely ping from time to time). -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29365