From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-162468-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 11327 invoked by alias); 7 Jun 2010 22:22:22 -0000
Received: (qmail 11307 invoked by uid 22791); 7 Jun 2010 22:22:21 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from vsmtp4.tin.it (HELO vsmtp4.tin.it) (212.216.176.224)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 07 Jun 2010 22:22:17 +0000
Received: from [192.168.0.4] (79.40.56.169) by vsmtp4.tin.it (8.5.113)        id 4BCE3CBE04ADD1AF; Tue, 8 Jun 2010 00:21:23 +0200
Message-ID: <4C0D70E3.5050109@oracle.com>
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2010 00:20:00 -0000
From: Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini@oracle.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100317 SUSE/3.0.4-1.1.1 Thunderbird/3.0.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Andrew Pinski <pinskia@gmail.com>
CC: Ian Lance Taylor <iant@google.com>,  NightStrike <nightstrike@gmail.com>, Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou@adacore.com>, gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: Patch pinging
References: <AANLkTimRPovANTXmj2WHsTjpWyZRjq05M0igERMkMIMY@mail.gmail.com>	<201006071901.03000.ebotcazou@adacore.com>	<AANLkTikdIHWbzuI5gZODPsL9TTsj0TsSdaT8To3yc6d6@mail.gmail.com>	<4C0D4A26.6080703@oracle.com>	<mcrwrua37qr.fsf@dhcp-172-17-9-151.mtv.corp.google.com>	<4C0D5792.8090005@oracle.com>	<mcrk4qa35nc.fsf@dhcp-172-17-9-151.mtv.corp.google.com>	<4C0D62F5.908@oracle.com> <AANLkTikappcDjcwEcggr9nd9BbeXR1KAtrF0pgdKw2gr@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikappcDjcwEcggr9nd9BbeXR1KAtrF0pgdKw2gr@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/>
Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org
X-SW-Source: 2010-06/txt/msg00301.txt.bz2

On 06/07/2010 11:40 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> I think a big way of solving this is through a non technical solution
> of having a person who just go through patches and mentors the "non
> regular" developers.
>   
The only point I want to stress again, or maybe clarify, is that if a
*person* is going to do that, I expect the "entity" to behave like a
person, thus intelligently, thus not sending out standardized requests
about patches which obviously have been committed already, as any
*human* can quickly understand looking at gcc-cvs, svn, whatever. If you
tell me that it would be a rather stressful job, I agree, and that's why
I think we should find a way to automate it, assuming it's a real issue
to somebody.

Paolo.