From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16125 invoked by alias); 2 Nov 2009 20:42:21 -0000 Mailing-List: contact archer-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Sender: Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Received: (qmail 16115 invoked by uid 22791); 2 Nov 2009 20:42:20 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Message-ID: <4AEF4424.7090704@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2009 20:42:00 -0000 From: Phil Muldoon User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.4pre) Gecko/20090922 Fedora/3.0-2.7.b4.fc11 Lightning/1.0pre Thunderbird/3.0b4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: richard.j.ward1@googlemail.com CC: Project Archer Subject: Re: [python][patch] Info about base class in gdb.Type References: <1245333024.4351.12.camel@elemental-lin> <4AEEE5A6.8060305@redhat.com> <4AEEF644.7070407@redhat.com> <1257191415.21520.6.camel@elemental-lin> In-Reply-To: <1257191415.21520.6.camel@elemental-lin> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2009-q4/txt/msg00041.txt.bz2 On 11/02/2009 07:50 PM, Richard Ward wrote: > On Mon, 2009-11-02 at 15:09 +0000, Phil Muldoon wrote: > >> On 11/02/2009 01:59 PM, Phil Muldoon wrote: >> >>> On 06/18/2009 02:50 PM, Richard Ward wrote: >>> >>>> A small patch to add a bool indicating if a class member as returned by >>>> the fields method on a gdb.Type represents a base class. >>>> >>>> PS. asked about this (and other patches I'll hopefully be sending) on >>>> IRC and was told to sign the copyright waiver thing for the FSF before >>>> submitting. Not sure if I need to give any info on that but the FSF say >>>> they have it now. >>>> >>>> 2009-05-28 Richard Ward >>>> >>>> * gdb/python/python-type.c >>>> convert_field adds a new bool entry "base_class" indicating >>>> whether the field represents a base class >>>> * gdb/doc/gdb.texinfo: >>>> updated to refelect the above. >>>> >>> Richard, >>> >>> I have a patch ready for upstream that depends on your patch. As you >>> have papers on file, can you submit this to FSF GDB upstream at >>> gdb-patches@sourceware.org? >>> >>> >> >> Oops part of my patch fixes a buglet in your is_base_class patch; the >> other section adds the beginnings of a testsuite for Python types. I >> can just merge the patches, ChangeLogs and submit it all upstream as one >> patch. What do you think? >> >> Regards >> >> Phil >> > Sounds fine to me. > > The only thing is I was rather hoping that my email would appear in > either the ChangeLogs or the version control logs (I'm looking for work > at the moment, and if I say in my CV or an interview that I submitted > some small patches to gdb I'd like to be able to prove it). Will that be > the case? If not then its not the end of the world That would definitely be the case (with ChangeLogs). The patches to gdb-patches would include an entry with your name on the ChangeLog but the patch to gdb-cvs (http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-cvs) would show up under my commit. However, if you want to combine the two patches and submit it, that would be totally fine for me too. It would help in building a case to MAINTAINERS addition/write-after-commit in FSF GDB for your own case. And another GDB commiter is always a good thing. I'm totally understand the situation, and will help in anyway way I can. Do you want to do the combining, patch-review, committing to FSF upstream? I'm totally fine with it. Regards Phil