From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 680 invoked by alias); 10 Jun 2009 15:00:32 -0000 Received: (qmail 467 invoked by uid 22791); 10 Jun 2009 15:00:28 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_FAIL X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx20.gnu.org (HELO mx20.gnu.org) (199.232.41.8) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 10 Jun 2009 15:00:19 +0000 Received: from mail.codesourcery.com ([65.74.133.4]) by mx20.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MEPHk-0003TP-MW for gcc@gcc.gnu.org; Wed, 10 Jun 2009 11:00:16 -0400 Received: (qmail 11032 invoked from network); 10 Jun 2009 15:00:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digraph.polyomino.org.uk) (joseph@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 10 Jun 2009 15:00:15 -0000 Received: from jsm28 (helo=localhost) by digraph.polyomino.org.uk with local-esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1MEPHi-0007L9-2y; Wed, 10 Jun 2009 15:00:14 +0000 Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2009 15:00:00 -0000 From: "Joseph S. Myers" To: Paolo Bonzini cc: Daniel Berlin , Ian Lance Taylor , Basile STARYNKEVITCH , GCC Mailing List Subject: Re: increasing the number of GCC reviewers In-Reply-To: <4A2FC533.7080800@gmail.com> Message-ID: References: <4A2E8528.8090604@starynkevitch.net> <4aca3dc20906091940r63296e84s18256473d8a7ad95@mail.gmail.com> <4A2FC533.7080800@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Detected-Operating-System: by mx20.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) 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 X-SW-Source: 2009-06/txt/msg00244.txt.bz2 On Wed, 10 Jun 2009, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > It is true however that currently we are not encouraging outsiders to > contribute, because old timers work on mostly large patches (or large > sequences of patches) that reviewers know about. For the same reason, it is > easier for small patches to fall through the cracks than large ones. And for all the other reasons I mentioned about patches from outsiders being liable to be harder to review. And when they are reviewed the contributor may lose interest and not go through all the steps needed to address issues from the review. So I don't think any tracking system should treat "needs changes from the submitter" as a state meaning "maintainers can ignore this indefinitely until a new submission"; patches in that state from new contributors could just as much do with human help from more experienced contributors to get the patches into shape (and I think such human help for badly formed contributions would be just as valuable in attracting new contributors as any technical solutions). -- Joseph S. Myers joseph@codesourcery.com