This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: Clean up patchwork.sourceware.org
- From: "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>
- To: "Carlos O'Donell" <carlos at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>, Siddhesh Poyarekar <siddhesh at redhat dot com>, GNU C Library <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2014 09:26:45 -0800
- Subject: Re: Clean up patchwork.sourceware.org
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20141127055452 dot GJ25419 at spoyarek dot pnq dot redhat dot com> <alpine dot DEB dot 2 dot 10 dot 1411271704190 dot 2940 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <5478A092 dot 7040407 at redhat dot com>
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Carlos O'Donell <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On 11/27/2014 12:08 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
>> On Thu, 27 Nov 2014, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:
>>> This is a reminder to everyone to clean up their committed/rejected
>>> patches from the patchwork.sourceware.org queue. The queue is now 4
>>> pages long!
>> Cleaning up entries for other people's patches is a good idea as well -
>> especially as occasional contributors are less likely to ping regularly
>> and part of the point of patchwork is to stop patches getting lost. (Of
>> course reviewing old patches you find and feel competent to review helps
>> as well.)
>> If there are several versions of the same patch there, and it's not yet
>> in, all except the last should be marked Superseded. I think "Not
>> Applicable" is right for a patch to something else (e.g. Linux kernel) on
>> which libc-alpha was CC:ed.
> I cleanup as often as I can, for example marking Alan's binutils patch
> as Not Applicable, and others as committed when committed.
> It still seems like we're loosing ground, but I think that's because
> we actually don't have enough reviewers :-)
I can help. I can't change state for most of submissions.