From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18856 invoked by alias); 17 Jan 2005 10:33:01 -0000 Mailing-List: contact binutils-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: binutils-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 18474 invoked from network); 17 Jan 2005 10:32:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 17 Jan 2005 10:32:50 -0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j0HAWosI018052; Mon, 17 Jan 2005 05:32:50 -0500 Received: from pobox.surrey.redhat.com (pobox.surrey.redhat.com [172.16.10.17]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id j0HAWiO04338; Mon, 17 Jan 2005 05:32:44 -0500 Received: from [172.31.0.98] (vpnuser4.surrey.redhat.com [172.16.9.4]) by pobox.surrey.redhat.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id j0HAWhxg003576; Mon, 17 Jan 2005 10:32:43 GMT Message-ID: <41EB9645.4040409@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 10:33:00 -0000 From: Nick Clifton User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (X11/20041206) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ian Lance Taylor , mark@codesourcery.com CC: libc-alpha@sources.redhat.com, binutils@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Branches in CVS repository? References: <200501150003.j0F03Wka006774@sirius.codesourcery.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2005-01/txt/msg00162.txt.bz2 Hi Ian, Hi Mark, >>The GCC project allows anyone with write privileges to create branches >>in the CVS repository for aribtrary purposes, provided that the usual >>guidelines regarding copyrights are followed. A typical use of these >>branches is for distributors to created branches to use for releases, >>or for developers to perform experiments. It's an effective way of >>making more information available to people without getting in the way >>of the mainline development. >> >>Does the same policy apply to GLIBC and/or Binutils? If not, could it >>be considered? > I don't think that the binutils group has ever developed a plan for > branches. I don't think anybody has ever wanted to make a binutils > branch other than the ones we make for releases. > > Personally I think it is perfectly reasonable to follow the gcc > approach: anybody with write privileges can create a branch, but all > commits to that branch require a copyright assignment just as with all > commits to mainline. > > Nick, Alan, any thoughts on this? I agree. I can no reason to block this kind of behaviour and good reasons to encourage it. So yes, I think that Mark should go ahead and create his branch. In fact if he would like to propose a paragraph to be added to binutils/MAINTAINERS that we be welcome as well. Cheers Nick