On 6/15/21 3:39 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On Tue, 15 Jun 2021 at 01:12, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 6/14/21 10:25 AM, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc-patches wrote:
I think this is an improvement on the current structure of the docs,
but I'd like to hear what others think.
The text looks more detailed a
On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 05:04:51PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 09:24:44AM -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > IMNSHO this all should emphasise *why* these things are recommended, and
> > don't pretend these are "rules" at all. They are not. The important
>
> Many of th
On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 09:24:44AM -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> IMNSHO this all should emphasise *why* these things are recommended, and
> don't pretend these are "rules" at all. They are not. The important
Many of them actually are rules.
Everything that is verified by the pre-commit hook
On Tue, 15 Jun 2021 at 15:25, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > Again, you're objecting to the current text:
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/contribute.html#patches
>
> Not at all, there are + in front, this is proposed new text.
Moved from one file to another.
>
> > > IMNSHO this all should emphasise *why*
On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 02:12:31PM +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Jun 2021 at 14:03, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 14, 2021 at 05:25:56PM +0100, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc-patches
> > wrote:
> > > We don't currently say document anything about commit format for the
> > > w
On Tue, 15 Jun 2021 at 14:03, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jun 14, 2021 at 05:25:56PM +0100, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc-patches
> wrote:
> > We don't currently say document anything about commit format for the
> > wwwdocs repo. Should the "wwwdocs" be a classifier (as in this email)
> > or a
On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 10:39:58AM +0100, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc-patches wrote:
> I think suggesting a single format (but allowing variations on it) is
> **much** better than not saying anything at all. For new contributors
> it's helpful to say "this is what we want" so they have a guideline to
>
On Mon, Jun 14, 2021 at 06:12:24PM -0600, Martin Sebor via Gcc-patches wrote:
> The text looks more detailed and arguably more accurate but also
> makes it sound more complicated and rigid than necessary.
+1
> (why ask for no space and not, for example PR #n?)
Because it is shorter. If your
On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 10:30:05AM +0100, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc-patches wrote:
> Slightly improved version, moving the "this highlights to the relevant
> maintainers that the patch might need their attention" back to the
> patch email docs, and adding rationale for good one-line subjects.
Ah, an
On Mon, Jun 14, 2021 at 05:25:56PM +0100, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc-patches wrote:
> We don't currently say document anything about commit format for the
> wwwdocs repo. Should the "wwwdocs" be a classifier (as in this email)
> or a component tag?
I use proper components for wwwdocs as well, and whe
On Tue, 15 Jun 2021 at 01:12, Martin Sebor wrote:
>
> On 6/14/21 10:25 AM, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > I think this is an improvement on the current structure of the docs,
> > but I'd like to hear what others think.
>
> The text looks more detailed and arguably more accurate but also
On 14/06/21 17:25 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
I think this is an improvement on the current structure of the docs,
but I'd like to hear what others think.
Slightly improved version, moving the "this highlights to the relevant
maintainers that the patch might need their attention" back to the
On 6/14/21 10:25 AM, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc-patches wrote:
I think this is an improvement on the current structure of the docs,
but I'd like to hear what others think.
The text looks more detailed and arguably more accurate but also
makes it sound more complicated and rigid than necessary. It
I think this is an improvement on the current structure of the docs,
but I'd like to hear what others think.
We don't currently say document anything about commit format for the
wwwdocs repo. Should the "wwwdocs" be a classifier (as in this email)
or a component tag?
commit 297dfc7049e5885de9ada
14 matches
Mail list logo
