Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GCC v. Arch address@hidden: Regressions on mainline]

[Matthew Dempsky]

Andrew Suffield <address@hidden> writes:

> Well, that's certainly one way to do it. In general there is no reason
> why these can't be many-to-one combinations (I can't draw that in
> ascii art, use your imagination), where several branches feed into
> one. I'd say that the dogpile was just another "developer" branch,
> though - the thing in the middle is the "patch queue" (that's where
> the name originally came from, after all), and there's no reason why
> anybody should notice it exists.

By Tom's own account, gcc is a highly modularized project so changes
in one area aren't likely to break other areas.  Perhaps an
organization with multiple integration branches maintained by a pqm
(one for each module) along with a core integration branch that merges
all of these together (also pqmified).

Each of the module integration branches could simply run their
appropriate test cases in the tinderbox foo while the core integration
branch runs the full test suite.

There's a possible risk that changing code in a module would break a
different module and not be noticed until the patch reaches the core
branch, but I'm sure the danger's no greater than present otherwise.

(Maybe this is what you were implying.)

-jivera