From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3947 invoked by alias); 24 Apr 2002 04:06:29 -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 3931 invoked from network); 24 Apr 2002 04:06:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (128.2.145.6) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 24 Apr 2002 04:06:27 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 170E35-0003Is-00; Wed, 24 Apr 2002 00:06:31 -0400 Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2002 21:06:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Michael Elizabeth Chastain Cc: msnyder@redhat.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [patch] fix pr reference syntax in gdb.c++/method.exp Message-ID: <20020424000631.A12659@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Michael Elizabeth Chastain , msnyder@redhat.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <200204240345.g3O3j6615086@duracef.shout.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200204240345.g3O3j6615086@duracef.shout.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.23i X-SW-Source: 2002-04/txt/msg00906.txt.bz2 On Tue, Apr 23, 2002 at 10:45:06PM -0500, Michael Elizabeth Chastain wrote: > Michael Snyder writes: > > I think the custom is to mark the second type as "[RFA]". > > Okay, I'll try that. It feels a little funny because I'm not actually > asking for approval, I'm asking for a veto (if any). That is, if no > response comes in, then I commit such a patch. In that case, I recommend RFC... but basically, if you're just posting to see if anyone objects, I'd use PATCH: foo and "I'll commit this in a few days unless someone minds". -- Daniel Jacobowitz Carnegie Mellon University MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer