Dave Korn <dave.korn.cyg...@gmail.com> wrote on 2010/10/27 13:59:00:
>
> On 27/10/2010 07:47, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> > Alan Modra <amo...@gmail.com> wrote on 2010/10/27 04:01:50:
> >> On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 12:53:00AM +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
> >>> On 26/10/2010 23:37, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Everything went dead quiet the minute I stated to send patches, what did
> >>>> I do wrong?
> >>> Nothing, you just ran into the lack-of-manpower problem. Sorry! And I
> >>> can't even help, I'm not a ppc maintainer.
> >> I also cannot approve gcc patches.
> >
> > Sent it to gcc-patches too. I already sent another gcc patch there but that
> > didn't
> > trigger any response either.
> > Perhaps you can notify whoever that can approve patches?
>
> We have a convention on the patches list; if a patch hasn't gotten an answer
> after ten to fourteen days or so, send a reply to the original post, adding
> "[PING]" to the beginning of the subject line. (Sometimes it can take two or
> three pings, unfortunately that's just a consequence of our limited
> resources.)
>
> I see your first patch was posted on the 19th. Give it another few days,
> then ping it. When you do so, you could also mention your other patch at the
> same time.
One ping and a few days later and nothing. Very frustrating. I don't
believe all PPC devs are so "busy" that none has the time to look
at a simple one liner. What is up?
Jocke
