erichkeane wrote:

> Hmm, no, I landed it because I made an assumption that there's simply not 
> that much interest in this work (I'm quite depressed about this in general 
> lately) so as a code owner I just made a call that it's probably good enough 
> to go and rely on post-commit review. Now that you bring this up, it does 
> sound a lot like I should get myself out of this mindset and at least ping 
> people first. Especially Erich who I specifically invited as the code owner 
> of clang attributes. Absolutely my bad. I definitely see how this isn't great 
> moving forward and I will do better from now on. Should I also revert and 
> give you folks time to properly review and course-correct me?

I hadn't noticed that you were the Analysis code owner.  I don't really see 
anything in the Clang stuff (which IS attributes and my perview) that require a 
revert.  Sorry for letting this drop off my backlog, I did one review on it at 
one point, then for some reason didn't come back to it.  A ping would have been 
appreciated (for next time), but no need to revert this time.



https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/80371
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to