From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26281 invoked by alias); 2 Oct 2013 12:46:10 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 26272 invoked by uid 89); 2 Oct 2013 12:46:10 -0000 Received: from mail-vb0-f46.google.com (HELO mail-vb0-f46.google.com) (209.85.212.46) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Wed, 02 Oct 2013 12:46:10 +0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,NO_RELAYS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mail-vb0-f46.google.com Received: by mail-vb0-f46.google.com with SMTP id p13so442204vbe.33 for ; Wed, 02 Oct 2013 05:46:07 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.52.161.231 with SMTP id xv7mr1564600vdb.1.1380717967683; Wed, 02 Oct 2013 05:46:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.221.63.73 with HTTP; Wed, 2 Oct 2013 05:46:07 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <524BD9EE.1080300@redhat.com> References: <5249A23F.8000901@embecosm.com> <524A9173.30301@redhat.com> <524ACD05.2020701@redhat.com> <20131001101941.n710f8j688owg4oo-nzlynne@webmail.spamcop.net> <524AE8FF.2010101@redhat.com> <524BD9EE.1080300@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2013 12:46:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Getting the ARC port reviewed and accepted From: David Edelsohn To: Andrew Haley Cc: Joern Rennecke , Richard Biener , jeremy.bennett@embecosm.com, David Edelsohn , GCC Development Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2013-10/txt/msg00034.txt.bz2 On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 4:31 AM, Andrew Haley wrote: > On 10/02/2013 12:47 AM, David Edelsohn wrote: >> It is unfortunate that global reviewers are so busy that they cannot >> review the few, infrequent new port submissions. But I find it very >> distasteful for someone to hyperventilate because other, busy people >> don't do something that appears obvious. > > I'm sure you do, but I find it far more distasteful to have a willing > volunteer blocked for so long under such circumstances. This is not > the way that we should be doing things. Productive, helpful suggestions on how to improve the situation are welcome. One issue is encouraging more recent but experienced GCC developers to become maintainers. Thanks, David