From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Original-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104]) by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4514D7EE99 for ; Sat, 11 Jan 2014 16:23:59 +0100 (CET) Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of adrien@notk.org) identity=pra; client-ip=91.121.71.147; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="adrien@notk.org"; x-sender="adrien@notk.org"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: Pass (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: domain of adrien@notk.org designates 91.121.71.147 as permitted sender) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=91.121.71.147; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="adrien@notk.org"; x-sender="adrien@notk.org"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible; x-record-type="v=spf1" Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of postmaster@nautica.notk.org) identity=helo; client-ip=91.121.71.147; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="adrien@notk.org"; x-sender="postmaster@nautica.notk.org"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AicFAKxh0VJbeUeT/2dsb2JhbABZgws4gwJSt3AWdIJPS0ACBRMOAhEFGDGIGwmZSY8RmnuBKY0GBwEBg0U1gRMEmBYBgTCQZYMuO4EsCRc X-IPAS-Result: AicFAKxh0VJbeUeT/2dsb2JhbABZgws4gwJSt3AWdIJPS0ACBRMOAhEFGDGIGwmZSY8RmnuBKY0GBwEBg0U1gRMEmBYBgTCQZYMuO4EsCRc X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.95,643,1384297200"; d="scan'208";a="44439104" Received: from nautica.notk.org ([91.121.71.147]) by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/ADH-AES256-SHA; 11 Jan 2014 16:23:58 +0100 Received: by nautica.notk.org (Postfix, from userid 1003) id BD618C009; Sat, 11 Jan 2014 16:23:57 +0100 (CET) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2014 16:23:57 +0100 From: Adrien Nader To: "caml-list@inria.fr" Message-ID: <20140111152357.GB28133@notk.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Subject: [Caml-list] Doing compiler patch review with a dedicated mailing-list Hi, (and sorry for the mail sent a few minutes ago :) ) I'd like to know what people think about having a mailing-list for reviews and tests of patches to the compiler and tools around it. The idea is to do something similar to the kernel mailing-list. I mostly like mantis and it is possible to attach files but it becomes fairly unreadable after a while. The audience is also mostly limited to people who are subscribed to the bug report. I hope this reduces the work and burden of reviewers and especially commiters. The goal is not to replace patches on mantis and you shouldn't believe this has been blessed by the core development team (nor mentionned to them actually). Instead, I hope this helps do quicker (and smaller?) iteration of patches. One example where I believe this would be useful is for the cross-compilation patches I've started getting upstreamed around one year ago. There are still many patchs which touch many files and definitely need tests on platforms I don't usually run. Another case is for patches which touch bits of the compiler almost no-one is familiar with; I think this could help get more input. Rules would be similar to http://linux.yyz.us/patch-format.html but less strict (that is also mostly something to begin with). In addition, there should be no specific reviewer or set of reviewers for a given component; it is also known, acknowledged and perfectly fine that the available time of reviewers varies. In practice this means you should not refrain from commenting on a patch because someone else usually handles a given topic. Of course, this requires two things: a bit of infrastructure (I hear it's much easier to create mailing-lists on ocaml.org than on inria's servers), and people (i.e. you). Anyone interested and willing to participate? -- Adrien Nader