From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5202 invoked by alias); 25 Jul 2008 13:11:28 -0000 Received: (qmail 5194 invoked by uid 22791); 25 Jul 2008 13:11:27 -0000 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from rgminet01.oracle.com (HELO rgminet01.oracle.com) (148.87.113.118) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 25 Jul 2008 13:10:56 +0000 Received: from agmgw1.us.oracle.com (agmgw1.us.oracle.com [152.68.180.212]) by rgminet01.oracle.com (Switch-3.2.4/Switch-3.1.6) with ESMTP id m6PDAUbj000754; Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:10:30 -0600 Received: from acsmt353.oracle.com (acsmt353.oracle.com [141.146.40.153]) by agmgw1.us.oracle.com (Switch-3.2.0/Switch-3.2.0) with ESMTP id m6OM0LJ6000863; Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:10:29 -0600 Received: from c-98-217-204-18.hsd1.ma.comcast.net by acsmt359.oracle.com with ESMTP id 11043910591216991364; Fri, 25 Jul 2008 08:09:24 -0500 Message-ID: <4889CF65.1090307@oracle.com> Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 13:11:00 -0000 From: Elena Zannoni Organization: Oracle USA Inc. User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (X11/20071115) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Phil Muldoon CC: Tom Tromey , Frysk List Subject: Re: meeting References: <48879E2E.5040200@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <48879E2E.5040200@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAQAAAAI= X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAQAAAAI= X-Whitelist: TRUE X-Whitelist: TRUE X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact frysk-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: frysk-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2008-q3/txt/msg00068.txt.bz2 Questions/comments: 1. how come not just a simple branch of gdb? It would seem the simplest alternative for doing merges? 2. I think a wise idea would be to settle on a set of host/targets combinations that should always work on archer. Ie those should be tested before doing a check in. elena Phil Muldoon wrote: > >> * Where to host? Lots of hosting choices out there, but sourceware >> seems like the default. We all have accounts, we have access, etc. >> I'd like to get things set up ASAP, say today. >> >> > As neutral a place as possible, without any distro or company related > connotations if possible . We have folks that can admin sourceware.org > and it has proven highly successful as a place to host, develop and > promote open source software. That is my vote. > >> - All patches must be reviewed by someone other than the author. >> - I forgot to mention this, but Apache-like, a strong objection >> should stall a patch until a rough consensus is reached. >> > > Is the +1, -1 or (abstain) system? > >> - Proposed patch review guidelines: >> * Does it have internal documentation (comments)? >> * Does it follow upstream coding style? >> * Does it have external documentation, if needed? >> * Does it have a test case, if needed? >> * Is it clear/complete/etc? >> >> > > Does it cause regressions to the existing test suite? Though this > should be formed as a promise from the user that testing has occurred, > re meeting. > > Regards > > Phil > -- Elena Zannoni, Oracle Senior Engineering Manager, Tools/Languages - Linux Engineering Blog: http://blogs.oracle.com/ezannoni Email: elena.zannoni@oracle.com