From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-15305-listarch-gdb-patches=sourceware.cygnus.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 4572 invoked by alias); 10 May 2002 18:27:58 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 4525 invoked from network); 10 May 2002 18:27:57 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO duracef.shout.net) (204.253.184.12)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 10 May 2002 18:27:57 -0000
Received: (from mec@localhost)
	by duracef.shout.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g4AIRu913183;
	Fri, 10 May 2002 13:27:56 -0500
Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 11:27:00 -0000
From: Michael Elizabeth Chastain <mec@shout.net>
Message-Id: <200205101827.g4AIRu913183@duracef.shout.net>
To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, petrs@caldera.com
Subject: Re: [RFH] F95 expression parser
X-SW-Source: 2002-05/txt/msg00353.txt.bz2

> 1) Should I submit it first to FSF for approval? I assume so.

Yes, but there seems to be some confusion here.  Sending work to
"gdb-patches" is the way you send it to the FSF.

> 2) Should a separate branch be created for the F95 support?
> Currently I don't think this is necessary.

I don't think so either, because it's not going to break any
existing code (including F77 code).

Michael C