On 13 June 2017 at 01:22, Mike Stump <mikest...@comcast.net> wrote: > On Jun 12, 2017, at 11:34 AM, Richard Sandiford > <richard.sandif...@linaro.org> wrote: >> >> I'm not sure who this is a question to really, but how much value is >> there in reviewing the other patches? > >> Maybe people who know the >> frontend interface well could comment on that part, but would anyone >> here be able to do a meaningful review of the core frontend? And AIUI >> some of the patches are straight imports from an external upstream. >> >> I was just wondering whether, once 5, 6 and 7 have been reviewed, >> accepting the rest would be a policy decision, or whether there >> was a plan for someone to review the whole series. > > So Iain might not have the whole game plan pre-arranged. My guess is that it > isn't yet. So, technically, people can argue for or against the FE as the > want, but ultimately, the SC I think gets to make the decision in the form of > accepting the FE contribution and appointing a FE maintainer. If they say > yes, then that person can technically self-review the changes to the > non-shared bits. For the shared bits, the usual maintainer for those bits > should review and approve those bits. For example, the testsuite changes are > reviewed by the testsuite maintainer; I've done that, so that's done. If > there are doc changes, a doc reviewer will review those bits and so on. > > I'd expect that for the changes that aren't shared, we treat it kinda like we > do for a new port. There, we usually have a person or two go through and > weigh in where useful and help refine things a little. If someone wants to > help out and volunteer to do this, they will. If not, then we just trust the > FE coming in. The SC will weigh in if they want the contribution contingent > upon a review. Of course, the global reviewers and/or the SC might be able > to clarify, as they keep track of the little details better than I, the above > is just my guess to help get the process started.
Right, I actually gave no forewarning other than via IRC, where it got an acknowledgement from Jakub and Richi, if I recall right, the response was asking if the SC has formally accepted D and myself as a maintainer. The answer is 'no' on that front. My initial intent was to get things in motion again, after they were abruptly halted 4 years ago. Regards, Iain.
