Re: [PATCH] doubled words

[Diego Novillo <dnovillo@google.com>]

On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 11:40, Jim Meyering <jim@meyering.net> wrote:
> Mike Stump wrote:
>> On Apr 16, 2011, at 4:04 AM, Gerald Pfeifer <gerald@pfeifer.com> wrote:
>>> On Fri, 15 Apr 2011, Mike Stump wrote:
>>>> I think these are obvious.
>>>
>>> Which means that you can commit them without getting explicit approval
>>
>> Well, technically, it means nothing...  It only means something if the
>> maintainer agrees with me, which in general we won't know until they
>> weighing.  Any person that checks in under that rule runs the risk of
>> a, no it isn't.  Now, if we had an obviousness maintainer, they could
>> just approve it; we'd only need a wave of a magic wand to get one.
>> :-)
>
> Hi Mike,
> If you hadn't said anything, I would have committed those typo fixes
> by now, based on what I perceived as your review/approval and on my
> reading of this part of http://gcc.gnu.org/svnwrite.html:
>
>    Free for all
>
>    The following changes can be made by everyone with SVN write access:
>
>    Fixes for obvious typos in ChangeLog files, docs, web pages,
>    comments and similar stuff. Just check in the fix and copy it
>    to gcc-patches. We don't want to get overly anal-retentive about
>    checkin policies.
>
> If that policy is no longer in effect or does not apply here,
> can you clarify or point to a more up to date policy?

It means exactly that.  If the change falls under the obvious rule,
you don't really need a review.  Simply send the patch to gcc-patches,
make sure you haven't broken anything and commit.

Feel free to commit any of the patches in this series of typo fixes
you just posted.


Diego.