From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <binutils-return-37256-listarch-binutils=sources.redhat.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 27643 invoked by alias); 19 Jan 2005 16:34:42 -0000
Mailing-List: contact binutils-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:binutils-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/binutils/>
List-Post: <mailto:binutils@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:binutils-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: binutils-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 27460 invoked from network); 19 Jan 2005 16:34:34 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31)
  by sourceware.org with SMTP; 19 Jan 2005 16:34:34 -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 j0JGYYoV014131
	for <binutils@sources.redhat.com>; Wed, 19 Jan 2005 11:34:34 -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 j0JGYXO18015;
	Wed, 19 Jan 2005 11:34:33 -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 j0JGYWUj002201;
	Wed, 19 Jan 2005 16:34:32 GMT
Message-ID: <41EE8E1D.9010703@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 16:34:00 -0000
From: Nick Clifton <nickc@redhat.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (X11/20041206)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Mark Mitchell <mark@codesourcery.com>
CC: DJ Delorie <dj@redhat.com>, binutils@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: Branches in CVS repository?
References: <200501150003.j0F03Wka006774@sirius.codesourcery.com>	<m3y8evcuf6.fsf@gossamer.airs.com> <41EB9645.4040409@redhat.com>	<41EBEACC.3010001@codesourcery.com> <jeekgkyp3r.fsf@sykes.suse.de>	<41EBEE05.8000105@codesourcery.com> <jeacr8yoau.fsf@sykes.suse.de> <41EBF2F9.6030302@codesourcery.com> <200501171743.j0HHhDPh017758@greed.delorie.com> <41EBFAFF.7050205@codesourcery.com> <41ECDA84.1030605@redhat.com> <41EDF572.20705@codesourcery.com> <41EE3125.6030301@redhat.com> <41EE816F.8040309@codesourcery.com> <41EE8694.3070008@redhat.com> <41EE8A28.3050702@codesourcery.com>
In-Reply-To: <41EE8A28.3050702@codesourcery.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SW-Source: 2005-01/txt/msg00251.txt.bz2

Hi Mark,

> I suggest the following: I'll prepare a patch for binutils/MAINTAINERS 
> that explains the policy, and submit it.  When I do that, you can decide 
> whether you want to require the <date> portion of the branch name, and, 
> if so, I will adjust the MAINTAINERS file before committing.  Is that a 
> reasonable way to proceed?

Yes - that would be excellent.

Cheers
   Nick