From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23030 invoked by alias); 2 Sep 2010 15:00:08 -0000 Received: (qmail 22992 invoked by uid 22791); 2 Sep 2010 15:00:04 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 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; Thu, 02 Sep 2010 14:59:59 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40CA42BACAF; Thu, 2 Sep 2010 10:59:57 -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 1JORwY26o6IP; Thu, 2 Sep 2010 10:59:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BAF452BAC92; Thu, 2 Sep 2010 10:59:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 997E9F599F; Thu, 2 Sep 2010 16:59:45 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2010 15:36:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Jan Kratochvil Cc: Pedro Alves , gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Daniel Jacobowitz , Eli Zaretskii , Mark Kettenis Subject: Re: [patch 1/9]#2 Rename `enum target_signal' to target_signal_t Message-ID: <20100902145945.GL2986@adacore.com> References: <20100901200621.GA11085@caradoc.them.org> <201009012108.56984.pedro@codesourcery.com> <201009020254.47745.pedro@codesourcery.com> <20100902103122.GA11298@host1.dyn.jankratochvil.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100902103122.GA11298@host1.dyn.jankratochvil.net> 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: 2010-09/txt/msg00091.txt.bz2 > Is ChangeLog required only for the final check-in? Or are global maintainers > excluded from the ChangeLog submit requirement? I have spent a whole day > writing it and the review did not get past the basic idea of my patchset. This was a proof of concept, and I think it's acceptable in this case to not send a ChangeLog. I think we request the ChangeLog with official submissions in order to have a chance to check it before it gets committed. But other than that, I rely more on the description of the patch than on the ChangeLog itself to tell me what the patch is about. Sorry about the time you spent writing a ChangeLog :-(. -- Joel