From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 30260 invoked by alias); 27 Aug 2010 14:40:37 -0000 Received: (qmail 30251 invoked by uid 22791); 27 Aug 2010 14:40:36 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 27 Aug 2010 14:39:51 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A57C52BACDE; Fri, 27 Aug 2010 10:39:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 9KGEXHasn5oZ; Fri, 27 Aug 2010 10:39:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F6782BACC5; Fri, 27 Aug 2010 10:39:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 81886F599F; Fri, 27 Aug 2010 16:39:46 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2010 14:40:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Hui Zhu Cc: Eli Zaretskii , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFA/DOC] record pic Message-ID: <20100827143946.GA2986@adacore.com> References: <83fx039kel.fsf@gnu.org> <83y6c1prnh.fsf@gnu.org> <83hbilnv4n.fsf@gnu.org> <8339u3ordt.fsf@gnu.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2010-08/txt/msg00460.txt.bz2 Hi Eli - Just a friendly ping... Also, sorry to be such a pest, but since this is dragging so long, and I can't really tell whether we're really all that close or not, I'd like to discuss the possibility of shipping a 7.2 with a less- than-perfect version of the doc for that part of the functionality (and get this properly finished in head and 7.2). I personally think that the delay on the 7.2 is getting ridiculous given the reason for that delay. I don't mind the delays when it's because of functional issues, but we're only 4 weeks away from the original schedule which we had decided to advance by 3-4 months (note: part of the delay is attributable to me letting things slip while disappearing from the face of the planet - I will not let that happen again). -- Joel