* [rfc] maint note on obsoleting code
@ 2002-01-24 8:59 Andrew Cagney
2002-01-24 9:09 ` Eli Zaretskii
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Cagney @ 2002-01-24 8:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb
In doing 5.1.1 (not my day) and further updating how-to-release I'm
thinking of adding the following under ``Obsoleting targets and code''.
@emph{Maintainer note: Obsoleting a target or code is actually a good
thing. Firstly it helps the developers by removing code that is either
no longer relevant or simply wrong. Secondly since it removes any
history associated with the file (effectively clearing the slate) the
developer has a much freer hand when it comes to fixing broken files.}
Does anyone have a better way of expressing this sentiment?
Andrew
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread* Re: [rfc] maint note on obsoleting code
2002-01-24 8:59 [rfc] maint note on obsoleting code Andrew Cagney
@ 2002-01-24 9:09 ` Eli Zaretskii
2002-01-29 8:33 ` Andrew Cagney
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2002-01-24 9:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Cagney; +Cc: gdb
On Thu, 24 Jan 2002, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> @emph{Maintainer note: Obsoleting a target or code is actually a good
> thing.
Aren't we supposed to be mightily sad when some target becomes obsolete?
They mostly do because no one wants to maintain them anymore, a user who
cannot afford hacking GDB will not be pleased...
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread* Re: [rfc] maint note on obsoleting code
2002-01-24 9:09 ` Eli Zaretskii
@ 2002-01-29 8:33 ` Andrew Cagney
2002-01-29 10:09 ` Eli Zaretskii
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Cagney @ 2002-01-29 8:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Eli Zaretskii; +Cc: gdb
> On Thu, 24 Jan 2002, Andrew Cagney wrote:
>
>
>> @emph{Maintainer note: Obsoleting a target or code is actually a good
>> thing.
>
>
> Aren't we supposed to be mightily sad when some target becomes obsolete?
> They mostly do because no one wants to maintain them anymore, a user who
> cannot afford hacking GDB will not be pleased...
It now reads:
@emph{Maintainer note: Removing old code, while regrettable, is a good
thing. Firstly it helps the developers by removing code that is either
no longer relevant or simply wrong. Secondly since it removes any
history associated with the file (effectively clearing the slate) the
developer has a much freer hand when it comes to fixing broken files.}
should it be softened further?
Andrew
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread* Re: [rfc] maint note on obsoleting code
2002-01-29 8:33 ` Andrew Cagney
@ 2002-01-29 10:09 ` Eli Zaretskii
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2002-01-29 10:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ac131313; +Cc: gdb
> Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 11:33:16 -0500
> From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com>
>
> @emph{Maintainer note: Removing old code, while regrettable, is a good
> thing. Firstly it helps the developers by removing code that is either
> no longer relevant or simply wrong. Secondly since it removes any
> history associated with the file (effectively clearing the slate) the
> developer has a much freer hand when it comes to fixing broken files.}
>
> should it be softened further?
It's okay with me.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2002-01-29 18:09 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2002-01-24 8:59 [rfc] maint note on obsoleting code Andrew Cagney
2002-01-24 9:09 ` Eli Zaretskii
2002-01-29 8:33 ` Andrew Cagney
2002-01-29 10:09 ` Eli Zaretskii
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox