suggestion for future changes to GDB website

suggestion for future changes to GDB website

[Joel Brobecker]

Hello,

I would like to suggest that we post changes to the htdocs CVS repository
to this mailing-list. That way, all developers have a chance to see and
react to changes. This does not necessarily mean that we should go
through the same formal process, with changelogs and all, but it would
be nice to see the patches, with a short explaination containing the
reason for the change if necessary.

Would that make sense?

-- 
Joel

Re: suggestion for future changes to GDB website

[Joel Brobecker]

> Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com> writes:
> > I would like to suggest that we post changes to the htdocs CVS repository
> > to this mailing-list. That way, all developers have a chance to see and
> > react to changes. This does not necessarily mean that we should go
> > through the same formal process, with changelogs and all, but it would
> > be nice to see the patches, with a short explaination containing the
> > reason for the change if necessary.
> 
> Do you mean posting the changes before they're committed, or after?

I'm thinking after, but it's not a strong opinion.

> If after, why not just set up an automatic patches list, as used for
> the source code?

That's an option. The nice thing about posting the patch here is that
you can add an explaination to the patch. Revision histories are
sometimes a bit obscure...

-- 
Joel

Re: suggestion for future changes to GDB website

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 15:22:34 -0700
> From: Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com>
> 
> I would like to suggest that we post changes to the htdocs CVS repository
> to this mailing-list.

What is in that repository? just the HTML version of the GDB manuals,
or something else?

Re: suggestion for future changes to GDB website

[Daniel Jacobowitz]

On Wed, Oct 26, 2005 at 08:44:53AM +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 15:22:34 -0700
> > From: Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com>
> > 
> > I would like to suggest that we post changes to the htdocs CVS repository
> > to this mailing-list.
> 
> What is in that repository? just the HTML version of the GDB manuals,
> or something else?

All the web pages: http://sourceware.org/gdb/.  And a script for
generating headers/footers.  It looks like the online docs aren't
actually in CVS.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC

Re: suggestion for future changes to GDB website

[Daniel Jacobowitz]

On Tue, Oct 25, 2005 at 05:29:23PM -0700, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> > Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com> writes:
> > > I would like to suggest that we post changes to the htdocs CVS repository
> > > to this mailing-list. That way, all developers have a chance to see and
> > > react to changes. This does not necessarily mean that we should go
> > > through the same formal process, with changelogs and all, but it would
> > > be nice to see the patches, with a short explaination containing the
> > > reason for the change if necessary.
> > 
> > Do you mean posting the changes before they're committed, or after?
> 
> I'm thinking after, but it's not a strong opinion.
> 
> > If after, why not just set up an automatic patches list, as used for
> > the source code?
> 
> That's an option. The nice thing about posting the patch here is that
> you can add an explaination to the patch. Revision histories are
> sometimes a bit obscure...

I'm strongly in favor of Joel's suggestion.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC

Re: suggestion for future changes to GDB website

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 08:55:03 -0400
> From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
> Cc: Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com>, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
> 
> > What is in that repository? just the HTML version of the GDB manuals,
> > or something else?
> 
> All the web pages: http://sourceware.org/gdb/.

Thanks.

Having looked at that, I agree that it would be good to post the
patches to that repository here.

Re: suggestion for future changes to GDB website

[Joel Brobecker]

> > That's an option. The nice thing about posting the patch here is that
> > you can add an explaination to the patch. Revision histories are
> > sometimes a bit obscure...
> 
> What would you want to put in an explanation that doesn't belong in a
> log entry?

Most of the time, the RH will contain everything necessary, so nothing
more will be added. I don't have any example offhand of when an
explanation need to complete the RH. Perhaps after making a change
on which you want to start a discussion.

I think both formats are going to work. Whichever people want, I'm ok,
as long as we see the changes being made, and that we get a chance of
reacting to them.

All the developers who answered were in favor of posting the changes
one way or the other. Let's agree on one of the following forms:

  1. Post patch to gdb-patches BEFORE checkin
     Not sure how to make things work: Approval needed? Etc.

  2. Post patch to gdb-patches AFTER checkin

  3. Have an automated system that sends the patch with RH to
     a mailing-list. Could be a dedicated mailing-list, or one
     of the GDB existing mailing lists.

I'm OK with either of the proposals.

-- 
Joel

Re: suggestion for future changes to GDB website

[Daniel Jacobowitz]

On Fri, Oct 28, 2005 at 11:03:25AM -0700, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> All the developers who answered were in favor of posting the changes
> one way or the other. Let's agree on one of the following forms:
> 
>   1. Post patch to gdb-patches BEFORE checkin
>      Not sure how to make things work: Approval needed? Etc.
> 
>   2. Post patch to gdb-patches AFTER checkin
> 
>   3. Have an automated system that sends the patch with RH to
>      a mailing-list. Could be a dedicated mailing-list, or one
>      of the GDB existing mailing lists.
> 
> I'm OK with either of the proposals.

How about just treating it like part of GDB?  Allow global maintainers
to make or approve changes, and list it in MAINTAINERS.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC

Re: suggestion for future changes to GDB website

[Joel Brobecker]

> How about just treating it like part of GDB?  Allow global maintainers
> to make or approve changes, and list it in MAINTAINERS.

This seems like a good idea to me.

-- 
Joel

Re: suggestion for future changes to GDB website

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 14:10:43 -0400
> From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
> Cc: Jim Blandy <jimb@redhat.com>, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
> 
> On Fri, Oct 28, 2005 at 11:03:25AM -0700, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> > All the developers who answered were in favor of posting the changes
> > one way or the other. Let's agree on one of the following forms:
> > 
> >   1. Post patch to gdb-patches BEFORE checkin
> >      Not sure how to make things work: Approval needed? Etc.
> > 
> >   2. Post patch to gdb-patches AFTER checkin
> > 
> >   3. Have an automated system that sends the patch with RH to
> >      a mailing-list. Could be a dedicated mailing-list, or one
> >      of the GDB existing mailing lists.
> > 
> > I'm OK with either of the proposals.
> 
> How about just treating it like part of GDB?  Allow global maintainers
> to make or approve changes, and list it in MAINTAINERS.

Yep, that's what I'd suggest as well.  Wed already have procedures in
place for dealing with RFA's, so let's just use them.