From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1909 invoked by alias); 4 Sep 2004 12:00:26 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 1902 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2004 12:00:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO legolas.inter.net.il) (192.114.186.24) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 4 Sep 2004 12:00:24 -0000 Received: from zaretski ([80.230.148.243]) by legolas.inter.net.il (MOS 3.5.3-GR) with ESMTP id CLS64208 (AUTH halo1); Sat, 4 Sep 2004 15:00:15 +0300 (IDT) Date: Sat, 04 Sep 2004 12:00:00 -0000 From: "Eli Zaretskii" To: Andrew Cagney Message-ID: <01c49276$Blat.v2.2.2$c81daa00@zahav.net.il> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 CC: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com In-reply-to: <413898FB.7080502@gnu.org> (message from Andrew Cagney on Fri, 03 Sep 2004 12:16:59 -0400) Subject: Re: [patch] Deprecate XM_FILE and TM_FILE Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: <41376681.4050203@gnu.org> <01c4912b$Blat.v2.2.2$2bea1980@zahav.net.il> <413898FB.7080502@gnu.org> X-SW-Source: 2004-09/txt/msg00076.txt.bz2 > Date: Fri, 03 Sep 2004 12:16:59 -0400 > From: Andrew Cagney > Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com > > I thought we discussed this with the attached. Did I miss a point where that discussion concluded that it was okay to deprecate xm-go32.h right away? For all I know, that discussion was about the idea in principle, and I somehow thought that you were offering to write the necessary configury stuff yourself. No one ever said to me that the next thing I'll see is the DJGPP port being deprecated. That is something I'd expect to be said explicitly, rather than in a committed patch that pretends to be ``obvious''. How in the world can you deprecate a port without first asking its designated maintainer, and without waiting for his/her explicit approval?? On a more general note, too many commits lately are too trigger-happy to my taste. There are fewer and fewer patches that are thoroughly discussed and where dissenting views are honored rather than ignored. For me, that makes the GDB development a much less enjoyable environment than it was for quite a few years before.