On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 1:01 PM, Eric Botcazou <ebotca...@adacore.com> wrote: >> Recently on #gcc, I have been conversing with several others on the >> topic of patches lost in the tides of the gcc-patches mailing list. I >> flagged Jeff Downs' recent message as an example of a patch that has >> been waiting since November >> (http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-06/msg00177.html). I then >> volunteered to be a patch pinger, to watch the mailing list and ping >> patches that don't get responses. I currently do this for Win64 work >> anyway, so I already read most of the mailing list as it is. > > I'd avoid sending random "Ping.. was this committed" messages though, that's > rather annoying. The gcc-cvs archives are http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/
Annoying or not, I wasn't offering to sift through svn commit logs. It's very trivial for me to read through a mailing list that I already read, and scan for messages that say "committed to branch B at revision R." It's a lot more complicated to find out if something has been committed myself, for every single patch out there, when the committer already knows and can send his followup message saying that the patch went in. Ideally, after a day of this, people will start sending such messages to effectively close threads, and then you'll see very few messages from me.
