From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19916 invoked by alias); 20 Aug 2007 19:11:45 -0000 Received: (qmail 19653 invoked by uid 22791); 20 Aug 2007 19:11:43 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from sibelius.xs4all.nl (HELO brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl) (82.92.89.47) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Mon, 20 Aug 2007 19:11:38 +0000 Received: from brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl (kettenis@localhost.sibelius.xs4all.nl [127.0.0.1]) by brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.14.1/8.14.0) with ESMTP id l7KJBFDC004699; Mon, 20 Aug 2007 21:11:15 +0200 (CEST) Received: (from kettenis@localhost) by brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.14.1/8.14.1/Submit) id l7KJBF0D023666; Mon, 20 Aug 2007 21:11:15 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2007 19:11:00 -0000 Message-Id: <200708201911.l7KJBF0D023666@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> From: Mark Kettenis To: msnyder@sonic.net CC: nickrob@snap.net.nz, msnyder@sonic.net, gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-reply-to: <16498.12.7.175.2.1187635019.squirrel@webmail.sonic.net> (msnyder@sonic.net) Subject: Re: NEWS for 6.7: mention coverity bug fixes References: <10983.12.7.175.2.1187377963.squirrel@webmail.sonic.net> <18118.17885.89039.298330@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> <000701c7e155$9bcfb8e0$677ba8c0@sonic.net> <18118.45892.919518.866568@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> <16498.12.7.175.2.1187635019.squirrel@webmail.sonic.net> Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-08/txt/msg00403.txt.bz2 > Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2007 11:36:59 -0700 (PDT) > From: msnyder@sonic.net > > There is precident for acknowledging the contributions of > institutions and corporations in the NEWS file: > > Configurations for embedded MIPS now include a simulator > contributed by Cygnus Solutions. > > Sparc configurations may now include the ERC32 simulator > contributed by the European Space Agency. > > What's wrong with acknowledging what Coverity has contributed? I don't think there anything wrong with that, unless we know Coverity is actively working against the Free Software communitiy. I do think however that your origional phrasing was a bit odd. "Coverity Issues" isn't really a meaningful description. I'd prefer if you added some sort of description about the class of bugs fixed and then add a variation on what you show above, like "found by Coverity Inc.". Mark