From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25283 invoked by alias); 16 Sep 2003 20:21:05 -0000 Mailing-List: contact overseers-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: overseers-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 25267 invoked from network); 16 Sep 2003 20:21:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO redhat.com) (66.187.230.200) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 16 Sep 2003 20:21:04 -0000 Received: by redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 201) id 43B376C6DE; Tue, 16 Sep 2003 16:21:00 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 20:21:00 -0000 From: Christopher Faylor To: Hans-Peter Nilsson Cc: overseers@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Problem sending request for RW access to GCC CVS Message-ID: <20030916202100.GK23057@redhat.com> Mail-Followup-To: Hans-Peter Nilsson , overseers@sources.redhat.com References: <20030916171058.GF18774@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-SW-Source: 2003-q3/txt/msg00219.txt.bz2 On Tue, Sep 16, 2003 at 03:39:24PM -0400, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: >On Tue, 16 Sep 2003, Christopher Faylor wrote: >>On Tue, Sep 16, 2003 at 12:56:40PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote: Is >>this YA case of someone not realizing that gcc.gnu.org and >>sources.redhat.com are one and the same? You could have saved both of >>us some work by just saying that you had an existing account and needed >>access to gcc. > >Here's a patch to save even more work. The email address is a tweaking >item and I couldn't bring myself to make it a mailto link. Thanks. I've applied this with some tweaking. I couldn't bring myself to make it a mailto and in fact tweaked it a bit to make it even less like a mail address. Something like this should have gone into this form years ago. I'm embarrassed that I wasn't more proactive in doing this myself. cgf