From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Clifton Subject: Re: [PATCH] Graphics corruption issues Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2010 00:23:27 +0100 Message-ID: <1272237807.5170.5.camel@pcjc2lap> References: <1271960341.13316.2.camel@pcjc2lap> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from ppsw-33.csi.cam.ac.uk (ppsw-33.csi.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.133]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E76989E732 for ; Sun, 25 Apr 2010 16:23:31 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org To: Alexander Lam , "intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org" List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org On Sun, 2010-04-25 at 18:52 -0400, Alexander Lam wrote: > It is usually preferred to post patches inline or else nobody will > look at them ;D. FWIW, we're actually pretty awful at patch triage in gEDA (the project I work on).. there are patches languishing in the bug tracker, and in various people's INBOX, so I can easily relate to the issue. Sadly, in our case.. the more complex the patch (perhaps the more effort the submitter has had to go to fix the bug / add a feature), the more likely it is to sit in limbo waiting for someone sufficiently familiar with the existing code to review the patch. -- Peter Clifton Electrical Engineering Division, Engineering Department, University of Cambridge, 9, JJ Thomson Avenue, Cambridge CB3 0FA Tel: +44 (0)7729 980173 - (No signal in the lab!) Tel: +44 (0)1223 748328 - (Shared lab phone, ask for me)