From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19357 invoked by alias); 23 Apr 2002 19:21:57 -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 19350 invoked from network); 23 Apr 2002 19:21:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO duracef.shout.net) (204.253.184.12) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 23 Apr 2002 19:21:55 -0000 Received: (from mec@localhost) by duracef.shout.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g3NJLtG25527; Tue, 23 Apr 2002 14:21:55 -0500 Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2002 12:21:00 -0000 From: Michael Elizabeth Chastain Message-Id: <200204231921.g3NJLtG25527@duracef.shout.net> To: msnyder@redhat.com Subject: Re: [patch] fix pr reference syntax in gdb.c++/method.exp Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com X-SW-Source: 2002-04/txt/msg00868.txt.bz2 Hmmm. Sometimes, like this time, I post patches to testsuite/gdb.c++ that I am committing immediately. And sometimes, I post patches for testsuite/gdb.c++ and give people a day or two to comment before I commit. Right now I am marking both of these as "[patch]". Michael Snyder writes: > If you want to avoid ambiguity, you could say "committed" > in your original "PATCH" message. I will do that, unless Andrew has something to say (I thought he liked to see explicit "committed" messages to help him mananage his inbox). Michael C