On 15/06/06, Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Jun 15, 2006, at 2:34 AM, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote: > I am new to the project so please don't take me too seriously if I am > saying some dumb thing: why review a patch that doesn't pass bootstrap > and check? This is not usually an issue. Yes most people will only test one target but that is only because it is takes a long time to bootstrap and test on just one target.
Sorry Andrew, I don't understand what you mean by "this" in "this is not usually an issue. Mike Stump proposed "a batch tester that would bootstrap and regression test on 2-5 platforms for all patch submitters post approval but pre-checkin." My point is that a batch tester post-approval is just wasting reviewers time, which seems to be one of the reasons why it takes so much time to approve patches. If there is a need for a batch tester, then it should be pre-review. Of course, this is just one little step. I don't expect that there is an ultimate solution, but a number of little steps that will, with time, improve the current situation. One would be batch testing pre-approval, another may be secondary maintainers who can reject and comment patches but need the approval of a maintainer to commit them.
