From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22071 invoked by alias); 2 Nov 2005 05:18:06 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 22034 invoked by uid 22791); 2 Nov 2005 05:18:04 -0000 Received: from s142-179-108-108.bc.hsia.telus.net (HELO takamaka.act-europe.fr) (142.179.108.108) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Wed, 02 Nov 2005 05:18:04 +0000 Received: by takamaka.act-europe.fr (Postfix, from userid 507) id 53C8847E6B; Tue, 1 Nov 2005 21:18:02 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2005 05:55:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl, gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [commit] Mention VAX floating-point support in NEWS Message-ID: <20051102051802.GC974@adacore.com> References: <200511010731.jA17VS9g027288@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <20051101225954.GB1107@adacore.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-SW-Source: 2005-11/txt/msg00028.txt.bz2 > Anyway, I'm amazed that people are so quick in forgetting the bitter > lessons we all should have learned from such recent events. That's not correct. I didn't forget what happened in the past, but I didn't come to the same conclusion as you did. I don't want to let the example of one person (AFAIK) affect the productivity of the rest. So far, I have been truly amazed at the positive attitude of all the maintainers, and at the collaboration that we have. My view is: Take a chance with your change. It's very easy to commit a followup change if the wording needs to be improved or to revert it if it turns out that it was improper. The thing is that it happens infrequently, so overall, it's less work, so more time to improve GDB. Now, that being said, I'm not a global maintainer, so it doesn't affect me. If you guys prefer to enforce RFAs, I won't in the least bit object. I was just giving my point of view on the matter. Just as an aside, we at AdaCore use the review-after-commit approach. This means that unless we're unsure of a change, we commit the change, and the other engineers then review that change after. Very often the change will be fine, but we have had occasions where we either had to improve the change or even revert it. No hard feelings, no wars, it's just part of human nature to sometimes fail. -- Joel