From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 37157 invoked by alias); 15 Oct 2019 01:33:25 -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 37143 invoked by uid 89); 15 Oct 2019 01:33:25 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-6.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 spammy= X-HELO: smtp.polymtl.ca Received: from smtp.polymtl.ca (HELO smtp.polymtl.ca) (132.207.4.11) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Tue, 15 Oct 2019 01:33:24 +0000 Received: from simark.ca (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp.polymtl.ca (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id x9F1XFxJ023188 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 14 Oct 2019 21:33:20 -0400 DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp.polymtl.ca x9F1XFxJ023188 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=polymtl.ca; s=default; t=1571103201; bh=ivzjDzKqAB84VvFB2RqrV1AoFsQYfyIVKJOaA8VRD7w=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=QkBuv32XVi8DwoAN3IQu0+/Gwfe5YUZltESFM9rsJnnKukKIhm6Pti8n+pxwGOjrY UiQW+ZZLRzV+Wj1LH8M8OM6aKbAzN+XbhUXa/Us4+at4GGbFj+bB7LvDCIsQ5uu2lK 3SK82hJ1it62hS4bpM64oW17UALjScezVax4bNhc= Received: from [10.0.0.11] (unknown [192.222.164.54]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 673A81E4C2; Mon, 14 Oct 2019 21:33:15 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: Gerrit To: Eli Zaretskii , Tom Tromey Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20191013045218.3261363-1-simon.marchi@polymtl.ca> <1c1f820fa507243fd7a2096ec3eb2454@polymtl.ca> <83r23fie80.fsf@gnu.org> <83k197i74c.fsf@gnu.org> <8c18a33556daaad6d35a0d2a4f987899@polymtl.ca> <83h84bi540.fsf@gnu.org> <87ftjvtdaj.fsf@tromey.com> <83d0ezi3fr.fsf@gnu.org> From: Simon Marchi Message-ID: Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2019 01:33:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <83d0ezi3fr.fsf@gnu.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2019-10/txt/msg00393.txt.bz2 On 2019-10-14 2:31 p.m., Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> From: Tom Tromey >> Cc: Simon Marchi , gdb-patches@sourceware.org >> Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2019 12:03:32 -0600 >> >>>>>>> "Eli" == Eli Zaretskii writes: >> >>>> The way I see it is that it's not really different than that person >>>> posting a patch with the same content on the mailing list. It's the >>>> same content, just a different format. >> >> Eli> Not exactly: having the code in a branch of our repository (again, >> Eli> assuming it can be regarded as "ours") means we are redistributing it, >> Eli> whereas having it in an email does not. >> >> But the email is all archived, so I still don't see the distinction. > > Anyone can send email to us, and we cannot be responsible for what > they send. By contrast, having it in our repository is tantamount to > redistributing it, because repositories are nowadays treated as a > means to distribute code (and some projects, like Gnulib, have no > other means). I'm not to sure how to continue this conversation. What can we do to settle this? In the mean time, I think it's fairly low risk to carry on with the project: we are not different from the thousands of public projects using a git-based review system, and I have never heard of this ever being an issue. Of course, we need to be as vigilant as today about what we merge in the master branch, since that will be what the GNU project releases. Simon