From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18672 invoked by alias); 26 Feb 2013 13:16:13 -0000 Received: (qmail 18575 invoked by uid 22791); 26 Feb 2013 13:16:12 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_SPAMHAUS_DROP,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 26 Feb 2013 13:16:08 +0000 Received: from int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.24]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r1QDG7R5029993 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 26 Feb 2013 08:16:07 -0500 Received: from host2.jankratochvil.net (ovpn-116-19.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.19]) by int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r1QDG3q6032645 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 26 Feb 2013 08:16:06 -0500 Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 13:16:00 -0000 From: Jan Kratochvil To: Yao Qi Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [patch] gdb/CONTRIBUTE update Message-ID: <20130226131603.GB15184@host2.jankratochvil.net> References: <20130221202629.GA30015@host2.jankratochvil.net> <512C80DA.5070600@codesourcery.com> <20130226093829.GA5802@host2.jankratochvil.net> <512C8583.4060607@codesourcery.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <512C8583.4060607@codesourcery.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-IsSubscribed: yes 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: 2013-02/txt/msg00653.txt.bz2 On Tue, 26 Feb 2013 10:50:59 +0100, Yao Qi wrote: > On 02/26/2013 05:38 PM, Jan Kratochvil wrote: > >This even is not an idea of mine, it was concluded on some GNU Tools Cauldron. > > If you meant Cauldron last year, I can't recall any discussions on this. IIRC it was there in Prague, it was just a small BoF, not too many people there. > >I do not speak here whether the patch itself should be included in the PING > >mail again or not, I do not find that important and it is also not expressed > >explicitly in the proposed paragraph above. > > OK. The subject is prefixed with "PING". What should we put in the > body of the mail? The url of the mail archive or something else? Any or IMO best all of: Patch repost. URL of the original message. Message-ID of the original message. This is all the subject of discussion as can be seen. Jan