From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29570 invoked by alias); 21 Apr 2006 01:16:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 29562 invoked by uid 22791); 21 Apr 2006 01:16:35 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from xproxy.gmail.com (HELO xproxy.gmail.com) (66.249.82.207) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 21 Apr 2006 01:16:32 +0000 Received: by xproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id s16so228299wxc for ; Thu, 20 Apr 2006 18:16:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.70.123.5 with SMTP id v5mr167569wxc; Thu, 20 Apr 2006 18:16:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.70.125.5 with HTTP; Thu, 20 Apr 2006 18:16:30 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <8f2776cb0604201816u5624bd34if608227cbef5ec49@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 01:16:00 -0000 From: "Jim Blandy" To: "Elena Zannoni" Subject: Re: RFC: Readline 5.1 import Cc: "Daniel Jacobowitz" , gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-Reply-To: <17479.61920.803213.910287@localhost.redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline References: <20060410180030.GA29115@nevyn.them.org> <17466.41960.90089.106620@localhost.redhat.com> <20060410184010.GA30365@nevyn.them.org> <17466.43406.495021.640065@localhost.redhat.com> <20060410185723.GA31129@nevyn.them.org> <20060420173208.GM11710@nevyn.them.org> <17479.61920.803213.910287@localhost.redhat.com> X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-04/txt/msg00306.txt.bz2 On 4/20/06, Elena Zannoni wrote: > We do already have a branch named FSF where the readline imports have > been done before. The same branch has ben used for importing pristine > versions of texinfo. It seems the people you have asked must not be > used to track code from 3rd parties, and are willing to cut corners. CVS vendor branches have some weird characteristics that I, at least, have found hard to work with. If someone feels using them isn't worth the trouble, I don't think it follows that they're "cutting corners"; time spent on maintenance machinery that doesn't pay its way is time not spent fixing bugs users actually see.