From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11149 invoked by alias); 11 Dec 2003 19:33:43 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 11140 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2003 19:33:41 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO touchme.toronto.redhat.com) (207.219.125.105) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 11 Dec 2003 19:33:41 -0000 Received: from redhat.com (toocool.toronto.redhat.com [172.16.14.72]) by touchme.toronto.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A7668001C9; Thu, 11 Dec 2003 14:33:41 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3FD8C695.6080400@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 19:33:00 -0000 From: "J. Johnston" Organization: Red Hat Inc. User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA]: breakpoint.c patch (prelude to pending breakpoint support) References: <3FD7C458.2080404@redhat.com> <3FD89C2E.9070906@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-12/txt/msg00323.txt.bz2 Eli Zaretskii wrote: >>Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 11:32:46 -0500 >>From: "J. Johnston" >> >>>Is this line really that long, or did your mailer mess it up? If the >>>former, it needs to be reformatted. >> >>Eli, I realize you are just making a minor comment, but can I ask that gdb >>maintainers please start trusting me on this. > > > Sorry, I didn't in any way mean to say that I didn't trust you. I > couldn't possibly know whether what I saw was a real mistake on your > part or not, and I think it isn't reasonable to request me to check > your previous ChangeLog entries in order to decide one way or the > other. One popular reason for messed-up formatting is your mailer, > so I took care to inquire about that before assuming that what I see > is what you meant. > > Could we please assume that the comments you get are meant to make > sure the code is up to the standards, not to diminish your abilities > or show signs of mistrust? > > No need to apologize. I wasn't trying to imply that you didn't trust me nor was I offended in any way. The request was to all gdb global maintainers out there. The comment about the line length for my ChangeLog entries comes up continously and I thought it was time I just pointed out that I am on the same page as everyone else with regards to this. -- Jeff J.