From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-102374-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 10815 invoked by alias); 10 Sep 2004 01:28:18 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/>
Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 10808 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2004 01:28:18 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu) (128.122.140.213)
  by sourceware.org with SMTP; 10 Sep 2004 01:28:18 -0000
Received: by vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu (4.1/1.34)
	id AA16780; Thu, 9 Sep 04 21:31:17 EDT
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 02:18:00 -0000
From: kenner@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu (Richard Kenner)
Message-Id: <10409100131.AA16780@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu>
To: giovannibajo@libero.it
Subject: Re: Reenabling Ada by default
Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
X-SW-Source: 2004-09/txt/msg00561.txt.bz2

    For sure, the *only* reason why I learnt GCC enough to submit patches
    and have them approved is because there was a public gcc-patches list.

I'm missing your point.  Nobody has suggested taking the Ada patches off
the gcc-patches list.