From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29834 invoked by alias); 7 Jan 2013 20:22:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 29811 invoked by uid 22791); 7 Jan 2013 20:22:10 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,FREEMAIL_FROM,KHOP_RCVD_TRUST,KHOP_SPAMHAUS_DROP,NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_YE X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-we0-f178.google.com (HELO mail-we0-f178.google.com) (74.125.82.178) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 07 Jan 2013 20:22:03 +0000 Received: by mail-we0-f178.google.com with SMTP id x43so11022907wey.9 for ; Mon, 07 Jan 2013 12:22:02 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.180.73.202 with SMTP id n10mr11275133wiv.17.1357590122231; Mon, 07 Jan 2013 12:22:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([2.26.203.77]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id ex6sm15305370wid.3.2013.01.07.12.22.00 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 07 Jan 2013 12:22:01 -0800 (PST) From: Richard Sandiford To: Bruce Korb Mail-Followup-To: Bruce Korb ,"Joseph S. Myers" , Jakub Jelinek , Andrew Pinski , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, rdsandiford@googlemail.com Cc: "Joseph S. Myers" , Jakub Jelinek , Andrew Pinski , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: [committed] 2011 and 2012 Copyright year updates References: <20130104125437.GN7269@tucnak.redhat.com> <20130104164845.GP7269@tucnak.redhat.com> <87ip7a5x1v.fsf@talisman.default> <87r4lw4vum.fsf@talisman.default> Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2013 20:22:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: (Bruce Korb's message of "Mon, 7 Jan 2013 11:59:20 -0800") Message-ID: <87mwwk4uc9.fsf@talisman.default> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2013-01/txt/msg00348.txt.bz2 Bruce Korb writes: > On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 11:49 AM, Richard Sandiford > wrote: >>> I think a patch for each directory will need posting separately for review >>> of such things as whether any imported / generated files are mistakenly >>> changed. >> >> So fixincludes/ separate from gcc/, and every library separate? OK. > > Separate? Seems pretty "inextricably intertwined" to me. > > Maybe I'm coming in too late in this conversation. > I'll just update the copyrights in the next few days. > It (fixincludes) has _certainly_ been updated every year of its existence. > (Probably ought not count the original shell script, though I did lift all > of its expressions....) Well, the idea is that the script will do it (this year and hopefully future years). It would be nice to get the stage where this stuff is mostly automated and not much hassle. It was just a question of whether to submit the fixincludes/ and gcc/ parts as one patch (as I'd originally done) or as two separate patches. Two separate patches probably makes more sense and I think is what Joseph was suggesting. Richard