From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26253 invoked by alias); 21 May 2008 03:30:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 26243 invoked by uid 22791); 21 May 2008 03:30:47 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Wed, 21 May 2008 03:30:30 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63F522A97C8; Tue, 20 May 2008 23:30:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id v28qRC8Z2btZ; Tue, 20 May 2008 23:30:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DE782A9748; Tue, 20 May 2008 23:30:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id BEA59E7ACD; Tue, 20 May 2008 20:30:25 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 09:33:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: nickrob@snap.net.nz, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] New annotation for threads Message-ID: <20080521033025.GB4080@adacore.com> References: <18458.21177.959458.278174@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> <20080501233703.GF3801@adacore.com> <18458.23326.25887.70597@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> <18478.48682.13900.951343@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> <18479.62120.536436.427524@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> <20080520035226.GA4669@adacore.com> <20080520182401.GA3895@adacore.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i 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: 2008-05/txt/msg00623.txt.bz2 > > | Separate unrelated change log entries with blank lines. When two entries > > | represent parts of the same change, so that they work together, then > > | don't put blank lines between them. Then you can omit the file name and > > | the asterisk when successive entries are in the same file. > > That's extra manual work that we shouldn't insist on. If several > entries represent a single changeset, one can precede them with a > single sentence saying what is the change about. Traditionally, we have followed the advice of the GNU Coding standards and not used the empty line when the changes were inter-related. I personally find that this makes the entry more readable, and I suspect that this was the reason behind the suggestion in the GCS - I can accept however that this is a matter of taste and also probably habit as well. But I think that asking someone to follow this rule is reasonable given the little amount of extra work that it requires. I would also suggest that emacs be fixed to follow the GCS. That being said, I'm not going to argue pro or against what you suggest. I am ok with the deviation if the other maintainers are. But in the meantime, I have to continue to make sure that contributions meet the GCS. -- Joel