François-Xavier Coud - Re: Fortran patch committed during freeze (original) (raw)

This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.orgmailing list for the GCC project.

• From: "François-Xavier Coudert"
• To: "Bernhard Fischer"
• Cc: "Brooks Moses" , fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
• Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 14:12:44 +0100
• Subject: Re: Fortran patch committed during freeze
• References: <200702112108.l1BL8SfJ012805@sparrowhawk.codesourcery.com> <Pine.LNX.4.44.0702111911540.9990-100000@www.eyesopen.com> <45D0080D.8030707@codesourcery.com> <20070212123041.GB16875@aon.at>

IIRC there was a convention to list the person who initially prepared the patch as the first entry and then the actual committer:

date original <orig@> committer <blame_me@>

Well, I would have said the "convention" was to do it the other way around, so it's probably not a very well known convention :)

The person who commits appears in the subversion info, and that's enough since it's only technical. When people look at ChangeLogs years from now, they won't mind who actually commited what, they want to know who wrote what. (and they still can find who commited what, if they really need).

Anyway, as was already mentionned, the branch status could be unclear to someone who only read the fortran list. I second the request that the change in the status of development branches are CCed to front-end lists. I think this is all we need to talk about.

FX

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Fortran patch committed during freeze
    * From: Mark Mitchell
• References:
  • Fortran patch committed during freeze
    * From: Mark Mitchell
  • Re: Fortran patch committed during freeze
    * From: Roger Sayle
  • Re: Fortran patch committed during freeze
    * From: Brooks Moses
  • Re: Fortran patch committed during freeze
    * From: Bernhard Fischer