On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 10:01 AM, Simon Baldwin <sim...@google.com> wrote: > On 31 August 2012 16:31, Ollie Wild <a...@google.com> wrote: >> > > The patch exactly meets the definition of google/integration only, > which is that it fixes up something that affects only Google's use of > gcc.
The criterion is more subtle than that. The google/integration branch is for things which: (a) cannot be submitted to trunk, and (b) are required for inter-operability with our build/test systems. The goal is to keep any changes relative to trunk as minimal as possible, and frankly, much of the stuff that's there now should be cleaned up and submitted upstream. > --no-canonical-prefixes is similar. That too is only in our > branches and not in trunk, for the same reason. But -no-canonical-prefixes *is* in trunk. Presumably the same people who benefit from that will also benefit from this. In fact, I think a reasonable case could be made that header canonicalization should be gated on the same flag. > > I'd rather keep this out of trunk unless there are known external use > cases where it's beneficial. That keeps both the review and the > testing load to acceptable -- though still extremely high -- levels. The same argument could be made about *any* patch we submit. Pushing upstream is always more work, but if we don't do it, we end up paying for it later. Ollie
