Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [cdt-dev] Proper handling of IP


I agree with Jeff. File the CQ and we'll figure something out. There's no
point in adding extra work to either you or the contributor for a 445 line

You could help the IP team out by making sure that you've personally read
the code and are happy that there's nothing funky-looking in there. And say
so on the CQ :)

You also need to ask the contributor the famous "three questions" to get
that documented on the bug.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> On Behalf Of Jeffrey Overbey
> Sent: February-16-12 11:30 AM
> To: CDT General developers list.
> Subject: Re: [cdt-dev] Proper handling of IP
> > The patch is now more than 250 lines (445) but the CQ deadline
> > ...
> > Since the patch addresses multiple fixes, would it be ok to
> > split the solution into multiple bugs and multiple smaller patches?
> Doug can say for sure (or could check with the IP team), but you might
> be able to commit the patch as-is.  The point of the CQ process is to
> mitigate risk; "250 lines" was chosen somewhat arbitrarily as the
> definition of a "small" contribution which has very little risk.  This
> patch isn't THAT much over the limit, and many of his 445 lines are
> comments or import statements anyway, so it would probably get triaged
> if you filed a CQ.  Splitting it into multiple patches would waste
> time and wouldn't mitigate any additional risk... and it's definitely
> a "small" contribution with virtually no IP risk anyway (right?).
> Jeff
> _______________________________________________
> cdt-dev mailing list
> cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx

Back to the top