From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-41242-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 30272 invoked by alias); 2 Nov 2005 04:28:31 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
Received: (qmail 30263 invoked by uid 22791); 2 Nov 2005 04:28:29 -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 04:28:29 +0000
Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 (IGLD-84-228-244-88.inter.net.il [84.228.244.88])
	by nitzan.inter.net.il (MOS 3.6.5-GR)
	with ESMTP id BVI41832 (AUTH halo1);
	Wed, 2 Nov 2005 06:28:24 +0200 (IST)
Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2005 04:32:00 -0000
Message-Id: <uirvb8yhh.fsf@gnu.org>
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
To: Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>
CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
In-reply-to: <20051101205628.GA4668@nevyn.them.org> (message from Daniel
	Jacobowitz on Tue, 1 Nov 2005 15:56:28 -0500)
Subject: Re: [commit] Mention VAX floating-point support in NEWS
Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
References: <200511010731.jA17VS9g027288@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <uoe5487py.fsf@gnu.org> <20051101205628.GA4668@nevyn.them.org>
X-SW-Source: 2005-11/txt/msg00025.txt.bz2

> Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2005 15:56:28 -0500
> From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
> Cc: Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>, gdb-patches@sourceware.org
> 
> On Tue, Nov 01, 2005 at 09:54:17PM +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > > Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2005 08:31:28 +0100 (CET)
> > > From: Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>
> > > 
> > > Thought this was worth mentioning.
> > 
> > It is, IMO.
> > 
> > > Committed,
> > 
> > Whatever happened to the custom to ask whether there are any
> > objections, or even (gasp!) make it an RFA?  NEWS is not one of the
> > files for which you are the responsible maintainer, and neither is
> > this change obvious, IMHO.
> 
> >From gdb/MAINTAINERS:
> 
> NEWS                    ALL

I don't know what this means, exactly (and MAINTAINERS doesn't
explain).  The practice until now was that changes to NEWS _were_
discussed.

Anyway, I think, after what's happened lately, we should try to err on
the side of more cooperation and collective decisions, not less.

> In any case, I don't see why additions to NEWS should require any more
> approval than the feature they're describing.  Why isn't it obvious?

It's not obvious because not every change we make goes into NEWS.