public inbox for overseers@sourceware.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ian Lance Taylor <ian@zembu.com>
To: kingdon@redhat.com
Cc: jlarmour@redhat.com, ac131313@cygnus.com,
	overseers@sourceware.cygnus.com
Subject: Re: A patch for toplevel Makefile.in
Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2000 06:08:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20000321034247.10042.qmail@daffy.airs.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200003202111.QAA08994@devserv.devel.redhat.com>

   Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 16:11:02 -0500
   From: Jim Kingdon <kingdon@redhat.com>

   > Perhaps we should consider adding a src-patches@sourceware list?

   Speaking of which, can the relevant people (gdb maintainer(s),
   binutils maintainer, newlib maintainer, whoever) get together and pick
   a project leader(s) for the "src" project?

   Right now people are sending me things like changes to the modules
   file, and that really should be a project issue rather than a
   sourceware issue.

   P.S. src-patches@sourceware sounds good to me.  But I'm not sure who
   is supposed to decide these things the way things are now.

So far we've gotten by with a general state of good-natured anarchy,
and as far as I am concerned that can continue.  In any case, I
reserve the right to complain about top-level changes that affect the
binutils.

As far as the modules file goes, I think people should just check in
changes provided they don't break anything.

Ian

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID
From: Ian Lance Taylor <ian@zembu.com>
To: kingdon@redhat.com
Cc: jlarmour@redhat.com, ac131313@cygnus.com,
	overseers@sourceware.cygnus.com
Subject: Re: A patch for toplevel Makefile.in
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 19:43:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20000321034247.10042.qmail@daffy.airs.com> (raw)
Message-ID: <20000320194300.ayiytKJ_8D23slE6pOKQBH-H-Ptmxynl5sapsX-wk6I@z> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200003202111.QAA08994@devserv.devel.redhat.com>

   Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 16:11:02 -0500
   From: Jim Kingdon <kingdon@redhat.com>

   > Perhaps we should consider adding a src-patches@sourceware list?

   Speaking of which, can the relevant people (gdb maintainer(s),
   binutils maintainer, newlib maintainer, whoever) get together and pick
   a project leader(s) for the "src" project?

   Right now people are sending me things like changes to the modules
   file, and that really should be a project issue rather than a
   sourceware issue.

   P.S. src-patches@sourceware sounds good to me.  But I'm not sure who
   is supposed to decide these things the way things are now.

So far we've gotten by with a general state of good-natured anarchy,
and as far as I am concerned that can continue.  In any case, I
reserve the right to complain about top-level changes that affect the
binutils.

As far as the modules file goes, I think people should just check in
changes provided they don't break anything.

Ian

  parent reply	other threads:[~2000-12-30  6:08 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <20000310125542.A6624@valinux.com>
     [not found] ` <38CD8CF3.CA81E01@cygnus.com>
2000-12-30  6:08   ` Jonathan Larmour
2000-03-20 12:56     ` Jonathan Larmour
2000-12-30  6:08     ` Jim Kingdon
2000-03-20 13:11       ` Jim Kingdon
2000-12-30  6:08       ` Ian Lance Taylor [this message]
2000-03-20 19:43         ` Ian Lance Taylor
2000-12-30  6:08         ` Jim Kingdon
2000-03-20 20:09           ` Jim Kingdon
2000-12-30  6:08       ` Frank Ch. Eigler
2000-03-20 14:35         ` Frank Ch. Eigler
2000-12-30  6:08       ` Andrew Cagney
2000-03-20 15:31         ` Andrew Cagney
2000-12-30  6:08         ` Jason Molenda
2000-03-20 18:38           ` Jason Molenda
2000-12-30  6:08           ` Jason Molenda
2000-03-20 18:43             ` Jason Molenda
2000-12-30  6:08           ` Andrew Cagney
2000-03-20 20:15             ` Andrew Cagney

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20000321034247.10042.qmail@daffy.airs.com \
    --to=ian@zembu.com \
    --cc=ac131313@cygnus.com \
    --cc=jlarmour@redhat.com \
    --cc=kingdon@redhat.com \
    --cc=overseers@sourceware.cygnus.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).