From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14245 invoked by alias); 31 Jul 2003 07:58:38 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 14238 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2003 07:58:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.osdl.org) (65.172.181.6) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 31 Jul 2003 07:58:37 -0000 Received: from fire-1.osdl.org (air1.pdx.osdl.net [172.20.0.5]) by mail.osdl.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h6V7wZI03034; Thu, 31 Jul 2003 00:58:35 -0700 Received: from osdl.org (fire.osdl.org [65.172.181.4]) by fire-1.osdl.org (8.12.8/8.12.8) with SMTP id h6V7wX98007852; Thu, 31 Jul 2003 00:58:33 -0700 Received: from 4.4.25.4 (SquirrelMail authenticated user rddunlap) by www.osdl.org with HTTP; Thu, 31 Jul 2003 00:58:33 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <33662.4.4.25.4.1059638313.squirrel@www.osdl.org> Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 09:47:00 -0000 Subject: Re: GCC From: "Randy.Dunlap" To: In-Reply-To: <20030731064707.GA20389@vitelus.com> References: <1059633859.3637.8.camel@steven.lr-s.tudelft.nl> <20030731064707.GA20389@vitelus.com> X-Priority: 3 Importance: Normal Cc: , MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-SW-Source: 2003-07/txt/msg02283.txt.bz2 > On Thu, Jul 31, 2003 at 08:44:19AM +0200, Steven Bosscher wrote: >> I'm not sure why they think it is so difficult. It would seem that if the >> patch is architecture-specific and well-formed (ie. conforming to the >> coding style, etc), it typically just goes in, period. And patches to >> target-independent code may go through one or two review cycles, but >> again, if the patch looks good, it goes in. At least, I got the >> impression that patches are seldomly rejected. > > Copyright assignments. Yes, it seemed to be more about legal issues than working with the gcc developers. ~Randy