From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19671 invoked by alias); 2 Nov 2005 18:40:44 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 19635 invoked by uid 22791); 2 Nov 2005 18:40:41 -0000 Received: from nitzan.inter.net.il (HELO nitzan.inter.net.il) (192.114.186.20) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Wed, 02 Nov 2005 18:40:41 +0000 Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 (IGLD-83-130-243-144.inter.net.il [83.130.243.144]) by nitzan.inter.net.il (MOS 3.6.5-GR) with ESMTP id BVP34790 (AUTH halo1); Wed, 2 Nov 2005 20:40:30 +0200 (IST) Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2005 20:34:00 -0000 Message-Id: From: Eli Zaretskii To: Joel Brobecker CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-reply-to: <20051102051802.GC974@adacore.com> (message from Joel Brobecker on Tue, 1 Nov 2005 21:18:02 -0800) Subject: Re: [commit] Mention VAX floating-point support in NEWS Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: <200511010731.jA17VS9g027288@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <20051101225954.GB1107@adacore.com> <20051102051802.GC974@adacore.com> X-SW-Source: 2005-11/txt/msg00040.txt.bz2 > Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2005 21:18:02 -0800 > From: Joel Brobecker > Cc: mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl, gdb-patches@sourceware.org > > I don't want to let the example of one person (AFAIK) affect the > productivity of the rest. I fail to see how asking for approval of a 2-liner, and a day or two of delay waiting for responses, could possibly affect productivity. For that matter, I don't see how changes in NEWS can affect development in the first place. > If you guys prefer to enforce RFAs, I won't in the least bit object. I don't want to enforce RFAs, I'd like to see people do that out of their free will. Cooperation and comradeship cannot be enforced. > Just as an aside, we at AdaCore use the review-after-commit approach. There are many different modes of doing this. Emacs, for example, uses commit-at-will-without-any-review, and it works fairly well (changes are almost never reverted). But as long as we are following the current GDB procedures and don't want to change them, we should adhere to them, letter and spirit, because that's the only way of restoring trust and good cooperative atmosphere.