From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27163 invoked by alias); 10 Jun 2003 14:30:57 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 26987 invoked from network); 10 Jun 2003 14:30:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO crack.them.org) (146.82.138.56) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 10 Jun 2003 14:30:56 -0000 Received: from dsl093-172-017.pit1.dsl.speakeasy.net ([66.93.172.17] helo=nevyn.them.org ident=mail) by crack.them.org with asmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 19PkA0-0002ak-00; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 09:31:40 -0500 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 19Pk9F-0000VG-00; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 10:30:53 -0400 Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 14:30:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org, binutils@sources.redhat.com, gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Updating to Autoconf 2.5x Message-ID: <20030610143052.GA1878@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org, binutils@sources.redhat.com, gdb@sources.redhat.com References: <87of17t2j4.fsf@egil.codesourcery.com> <3EE4F6AD.7060300@redhat.com> <20030609210940.GA15597@redhat.com> <20030609163836.A20345@synopsys.com> <200306092345.h59Nj3Tf021127@envy.delorie.com> <20030609173251.A20668@synopsys.com> <873ciitunz.fsf@egil.codesourcery.com> <1055227336.9370.14.camel@doubledemon.codesourcery.com> <20030610142305.GA1643@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030610142305.GA1643@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-SW-Source: 2003-06/txt/msg00161.txt.bz2 On Tue, Jun 10, 2003 at 10:23:05AM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote: > On Mon, Jun 09, 2003 at 11:42:15PM -0700, Mark Mitchell wrote: > >Zack took proactive action to try to move towards solving an important > >problem. He set up a short-term list to try to involve people in an > >open discussion about what needed to be done. I'm disappointed that the > >responses are dealing with the domain name and not with the topic at > >hand. > > I apologize for even raising an opinion. I appreciate Zack's intent. > > I agree that a lot of discussion about this issue is silly, so unless > there is a consensus that we (i.e., I) should set up a toplevel mailing > list, I think that we should just use Zack's list and move on to > actually doing the work it was designed to foster. Like a lot of other people, I don't care which list this project happens on. I'm on Zack's list and I intend to use it. However, I think that it's past time we had a toplevel@ list; can that be created anyway? -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer