Re: NEWS for 6.7: mention coverity bug fixes

["Michael Snyder" <msnyder@sonic.net>]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Nick Roberts" <nickrob@snap.net.nz>
To: "Michael Snyder" <msnyder@sonic.net>
Cc: <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
Sent: Saturday, August 18, 2007 1:52 AM
Subject: Re: NEWS for 6.7: mention coverity bug fixes


> > > I can imagine that Coverity would like recognition when their software
is
>  > > successfully used to find bugs in free software projects, but I don't
>  > > think that NEWS is the right place to do it.  This file details what
>  > > changes have been made to GDB, not how they were made or how many
were
>  > > made.  You already mention Coverity in the ChangeLogs, which seems
the
>  > > right thing to do.  _They_ can then use this as evidence to any
claims
>  > > that they might wish to make about their software.
>  >
>  > Actually I stopped mentioning them in the changelogs, when
>  > one of the Binutils maintainers said that they thought it was
>  > inappropriate.
>
> I think I can see this in the archives where he suggests writing what he
calls
> a NEWS entry but then refers to http://gcc.gnu.org/news.html, for which
there
> appears to be no GDB equivalent.  I thought the NEWS _file_ was aimed at
the
> users of GDB.  To that extent the bug fixes made through Coverity are only
> relevant here if they provide a noticeable difference, e.g., users were
> complaining about crashes and leakages which have been fixed.
>
> I guess if Coverity is proprietary software then the Free Software line
may be
> that it gets no mention. However, the ChangeLog seems appropriate to me,
just
> as it is the place where the author gets recognition for his/her
contribution.

That was indeed my first thought.

Would you suggest, then, that I go back and annotate the 60 or so
change log entries I've made that refer to fixing Coverity issues?