From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23234 invoked by alias); 3 Dec 2012 09:16:31 -0000 Received: (qmail 23222 invoked by uid 22791); 3 Dec 2012 09:16:29 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_NO X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 03 Dec 2012 09:16:24 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D02E11C7C0A; Mon, 3 Dec 2012 04:16:23 -0500 (EST) 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 PWboLPmIm17W; Mon, 3 Dec 2012 04:16:23 -0500 (EST) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65F0F1C7BF0; Mon, 3 Dec 2012 04:16:23 -0500 (EST) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id C089EC3746; Mon, 3 Dec 2012 13:16:10 +0400 (RET) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2012 09:16:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Doug Evans Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: proposal for branch patches after first release Message-ID: <20121203091610.GA18586@adacore.com> References: <20121129141415.GJ3540@adacore.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) 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: 2012-12/txt/msg00015.txt.bz2 > If it were me I'd just diff the ChangeLogs, write something based on > that (but not worry about being too detailed if it'll take too much > time to dig deeper), require bug numbers or whatever to be in the > ChangeLogs, and leave it at that. In practice, many patches are often difficult to gauge, at least for me. So this would be noticeably affecting the quality of the announcement, to the point where I'd ask myself whether there might be any point in going through the exercise at all. All I need is a little help from the person the author, by ways of a note, somewhere, explaining what it does. It doesn't matter as much where the information is. It can be a "release notes" file, or even the wiki. To me, it seems better to keep that information inside the GDB sources, so I'd personally go with that. -- Joel