Hello, > >Although you have listed it as "stage 2", I wish to commit the finished > >portion as soon as possible during stage 1. I have maintainership > >authority > >to do so. This will not interfere in any way with *any* of the projects > >approved for stage 1, since it is in a disjoint section of code. > > If it breaks bootstrap, it will definitely interfere. If it causes > patch conflicts with other changes it will also interfere. And if it > doesn't cause any patch conflicts, then it probably won't be very hard > to maintain on a branch. > > > Accordingly, I plan to do so unless I am told not to. > > I would certainly prefer that you hold off until Stage 2, as indicated > by the documented I posted.
I must admit I have very bad feeling about the whole "4.1 Projects" stuff. IMHO this over-organizes things. If people in general disagree with the Nathan's changes, or if there are any reasons to think that they are not tested enough or whatever when he submits them, of course that is something else. But I don't think having just a single person decide which patches may go in and which must wait, or even just judging their importance, is a good idea. Argument "If it breaks bootstrap, ..." -- well, if it is a large or intrusive patch, it is natural to expect it to be tested even more than the rules request, including bootstrap on several platforms. Some breakage during Stage 1 is probably unavoidable. I did not notice any significant problems due to this since I started working on gcc (2001), however. Zdenek
