From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26426 invoked by alias); 17 Jun 2005 03:22:38 -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 26411 invoked by uid 22791); 17 Jun 2005 03:22:36 -0000 Received: from nevyn.them.org (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Fri, 17 Jun 2005 03:22:36 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.51) id 1Dj7RC-0001ja-Gu; Thu, 16 Jun 2005 23:22:34 -0400 Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2005 03:22:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Nick Roberts Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] -data-list-changed-registers (Take 2) Message-ID: <20050617032234.GG17013@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Nick Roberts , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <17060.46539.131335.71422@farnswood.snap.net.nz> <17066.35303.833870.612064@farnswood.snap.net.nz> <20050613024022.GB9288@nevyn.them.org> <17069.4116.293354.462840@farnswood.snap.net.nz> <20050613134759.GA7102@nevyn.them.org> <17070.2773.135064.388886@farnswood.snap.net.nz> <20050613224215.GA13598@nevyn.them.org> <17070.17646.968472.157418@farnswood.snap.net.nz> <20050617015059.GC17013@nevyn.them.org> <17074.16470.814479.200726@farnswood.snap.net.nz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <17074.16470.814479.200726@farnswood.snap.net.nz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i X-SW-Source: 2005-06/txt/msg00239.txt.bz2 On Fri, Jun 17, 2005 at 03:15:34PM +1200, Nick Roberts wrote: > > The only reason I haven't approved the gdb-mi.el you last posted was > > because it depended on the MI patch which you just reminded me to look > > at (which was an interface change, and I hadn't had a chance to > > digest it yet). I do not want you to commit anything which uses MI > > interfaces that don't exist yet! Normally, I'd be perfectly willing to > > rubber-stamp it in. > > I'm thinking more generally. In Emacs, I commit about one change a week. If > I need approval, then I will group changes together and do it less often, but > someone is always available to approve those changes then there is no problem. Let's hold this thought for a little bit. It may make sense for you to commit these without approval in the future, once we've found our stride again. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery, LLC