Re: meeting

[Elena Zannoni <elena dot zannoni at oracle dot com>]

Questions/comments:
1. how come not just a simple branch of gdb? It would seem the simplest 
alternative for doing merges?

2. I think a wise idea would be to settle on a set of host/targets 
combinations that should always work on
archer. Ie those should be tested before doing a check in.

elena


Phil Muldoon wrote:
> > * Where to host?  Lots of hosting choices out there, but sourceware
> >   seems like the default.  We all have accounts, we have access, etc.
> >   I'd like to get things set up ASAP, say today.
> >
> >   
> As neutral a place as possible, without any distro or company related 
> connotations if possible . We have folks that can admin sourceware.org 
> and it has proven highly successful as a place to host, develop and 
> promote open source software. That is my vote.
>
> >   - All patches must be reviewed by someone other than the author.
> >   - I forgot to mention this, but Apache-like, a strong objection
> >     should stall a patch until a rough consensus is reached.
> >   
>
> Is the +1, -1 or (abstain) system?
>
> >   - Proposed patch review guidelines:
> >     * Does it have internal documentation (comments)?
> >     * Does it follow upstream coding style?
> >     * Does it have external documentation, if needed?
> >     * Does it have a test case, if needed?
> >     * Is it clear/complete/etc?
> >
> >   
>
> Does it cause regressions to the existing test suite? Though this 
> should be formed as a promise from the user that testing has occurred, 
> re meeting.
>
> Regards
>
> Phil


--
Elena Zannoni, Oracle
Senior Engineering Manager, Tools/Languages - Linux Engineering
Blog: http://blogs.oracle.com/ezannoni
Email: elena.zannoni@oracle.com