On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 11:40, Jim Meyering <j...@meyering.net> wrote: > Mike Stump wrote: >> On Apr 16, 2011, at 4:04 AM, Gerald Pfeifer <ger...@pfeifer.com> wrote: >>> On Fri, 15 Apr 2011, Mike Stump wrote: >>>> I think these are obvious. >>> >>> Which means that you can commit them without getting explicit approval >> >> Well, technically, it means nothing... It only means something if the >> maintainer agrees with me, which in general we won't know until they >> weighing. Any person that checks in under that rule runs the risk of >> a, no it isn't. Now, if we had an obviousness maintainer, they could >> just approve it; we'd only need a wave of a magic wand to get one. >> :-) > > Hi Mike, > If you hadn't said anything, I would have committed those typo fixes > by now, based on what I perceived as your review/approval and on my > reading of this part of http://gcc.gnu.org/svnwrite.html: > > Free for all > > The following changes can be made by everyone with SVN write access: > > Fixes for obvious typos in ChangeLog files, docs, web pages, > comments and similar stuff. Just check in the fix and copy it > to gcc-patches. We don't want to get overly anal-retentive about > checkin policies. > > If that policy is no longer in effect or does not apply here, > can you clarify or point to a more up to date policy?
It means exactly that. If the change falls under the obvious rule, you don't really need a review. Simply send the patch to gcc-patches, make sure you haven't broken anything and commit. Feel free to commit any of the patches in this series of typo fixes you just posted. Diego.
