From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14857 invoked by alias); 5 Jul 2002 17:54:32 -0000 Mailing-List: contact ecos-maintainers-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: ecos-maintainers-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 14813 invoked from network); 5 Jul 2002 17:54:29 -0000 Message-ID: <3D25DD54.BEE01AE1@jifvik.org> Date: Fri, 05 Jul 2002 10:54:00 -0000 From: Jonathan Larmour X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.19-7.0.10enterprise i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrew Lunn Cc: ecos-maintainers@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Patches not getting into the tree? References: <20020704051720.98EE76DA23@www.fastmail.fm> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2002-07/txt/msg00003.txt.bz2 Andrew Lunn wrote: > > I guys > > Whats happening about getting patches into the CVS tree? eg > > http://sources.redhat.com/ml/ecos-patches/2002-06/msg00030.html > > has not made it in yet. Is mailing to ecos-patches enough or do we need > to do more? I intend to work on the backlog a bit. As well as being suckered into returning to Red Hat for my notice, my spare eCos time has been devoted to some book reviewing that's had a hard time limit on it. There's temporarily a hiatus, so I'll see what I can do. For some of the outstanding patches though, we'll come back to copyright assignment requirements, and we don't have a good story on that yet. We'll have to go with RH assignments for now. Jifl -- --[ "You can complain because roses have thorns, or you ]-- --[ can rejoice because thorns have roses." -Lincoln ]-- Opinions==mine