From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18640 invoked by alias); 13 Oct 2009 13:48:17 -0000 Received: (qmail 18621 invoked by uid 22791); 13 Oct 2009 13:48:14 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 13 Oct 2009 13:48:09 +0000 Received: from int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.18]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n9DDm1gN006160; Tue, 13 Oct 2009 09:48:01 -0400 Received: from [IPv6:::1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n9DDm0Nx017914; Tue, 13 Oct 2009 09:48:00 -0400 Message-ID: <4AD48510.1010701@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 13:50:00 -0000 From: Jason Merrill User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.1.5pre) Gecko/20091011 Shredder/3.0pre MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Michael Matz CC: Paolo Bonzini , "Joseph S. Myers" , Richard Guenther , gdr@integrable-solutions.net, gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: delete dead feature branches? References: <4ABD0F1E.5030807@redhat.com> <206fcf960909251214u5770c7b5o141614226e28fdff@mail.gmail.com> <84fc9c000909251220r62d518bka48cd3a13d0d5ea0@mail.gmail.com> <4AD33BA2.60107@gnu.org> <4AD39C64.3020304@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2009-10/txt/msg00280.txt.bz2 On 10/12/2009 09:05 PM, Michael Matz wrote: > I don't think we should necessarily limit ourself by bugs in foreign tools > if it reduces useful information. What about a new top-level directory > dead-branches/, not under branches/ but parallel to it? Should be easy to > exempt from git-svn handling, shouldn't it? Yes, git-svn would ignore such a directory. Jason