From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7180 invoked by alias); 25 May 2010 20:38:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 7164 invoked by uid 22791); 25 May 2010 20:38:42 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_40,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 25 May 2010 20:38:38 +0000 Received: from int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.18]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o4PKcawE030721 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 25 May 2010 16:38:36 -0400 Received: from greed.delorie.com (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o4PKcYpR016318 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 25 May 2010 16:38:35 -0400 Received: from greed.delorie.com (greed.delorie.com [127.0.0.1] (may be forged)) by greed.delorie.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o4PKcYEY023711; Tue, 25 May 2010 16:38:34 -0400 Received: (from dj@localhost) by greed.delorie.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id o4PKcYGB023708; Tue, 25 May 2010 16:38:34 -0400 Date: Tue, 25 May 2010 20:38:00 -0000 Message-Id: <201005252038.o4PKcYGB023708@greed.delorie.com> From: DJ Delorie To: Paolo Bonzini CC: binutils@sourceware.org, gdb@sourceware.org, gcc@gnu.org In-reply-to: <4BFBF578.40904@gnu.org> (message from Paolo Bonzini on Tue, 25 May 2010 18:06:16 +0200) Subject: Re: toplevel out of sync References: <4BFBF578.40904@gnu.org> X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2010-05/txt/msg00079.txt.bz2 > Also, I would like to make a new policy that from now on patches to > the toplevel cannot be committed by anyone who doesn't have write > access to both gcc and src. Is there any agreement on this? Our current policy certainly doesn't work, either we come up with something that will, or abandon the whole idea and let chaos reign. > In particular, if DJ could provide with the last date when the tree > was synchronized that would help. I don't recall. It's stricly a manual process.