From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18422 invoked by alias); 24 Jan 2014 03:06:24 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 18409 invoked by uid 89); 24 Jan 2014 03:06:22 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 24 Jan 2014 03:06:21 +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 s0O36IsT016539 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 23 Jan 2014 22:06:18 -0500 Received: from barimba (ovpn-113-85.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.113.85]) by int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s0O36HKR005364 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 23 Jan 2014 22:06:18 -0500 From: Tom Tromey To: Joel Brobecker Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: reject merges on gdb release branches? References: <20140122051133.GB4762@adacore.com> <20140123055758.GG4762@adacore.com> <87r47y4soq.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <20140124021842.GK4762@adacore.com> Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2014 03:06:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20140124021842.GK4762@adacore.com> (Joel Brobecker's message of "Fri, 24 Jan 2014 06:18:42 +0400") Message-ID: <8738ke13km.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-SW-Source: 2014-01/txt/msg00912.txt.bz2 Joel> At AdaCore, we use a comma-separated list of regular expressions Joel> to match the branches for which a features should not be applied. Joel> Perhaps we could do the same? I don't have much time right now Joel> either, so status quo ante it is. The syntax is just determined by the update hook script. So I think we'd need a different script. We have modest needs so it maybe isn't too hard to find an appropriate one. I can't do it now. Tom