On Mar 1, 2007, at 4:51 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
No I am not saying that. I am saying that those patches might not
be worth commenting on.
Or, maybe they are. I think it would be better to have a policy that
addresses this issue, rather than require 18 months of silence for
someone to infer it. Maybe I should just send out an email
I don't see why:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-02/msg02031.html
was a bad thing. i think gcc would have been better if it had just
been committed.
Likewise:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-03/msg00167.html
If you feel they are worth commenting on, then comment on them but
I don't see you commenting on those patches at all.
Only so much time in the day. I occasionally do comment on them.
I have not seen any patches that require 4-5 pings,
You must not be subscribed to the gcc-patches list:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-03/msg00052.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-03/msg00051.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-03/msg00048.html
?
