From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17651 invoked by alias); 19 Feb 2003 16:24:29 -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 17597 invoked from network); 19 Feb 2003 16:24:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (172.16.49.200) by 172.16.49.205 with SMTP; 19 Feb 2003 16:24:28 -0000 Received: from redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 711232E96; Wed, 19 Feb 2003 11:29:13 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3E53B0D9.2070009@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 16:24:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20030217 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: Elena Zannoni , gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [maint] The GDB maintenance process References: <20030217180709.GA19866@nevyn.them.org> <20030218042847.50F2E3CE5@localhost.redhat.com> <20030217180709.GA19866@nevyn.them.org> <20030218023553.2BBB73D02@localhost.redhat.com> <20030217180709.GA19866@nevyn.them.org> <15953.20132.193102.752916@localhost.redhat.com> <20030219014904.GA11446@nevyn.them.org> <3E539FF8.70201@redhat.com> <20030219152123.GA4751@nevyn.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-02/txt/msg00351.txt.bz2 > Which reminds me. We've got two GNATS databases set up for GDB: 'gdb' > and 'gdb-patches'. Should we use the gdb-patches GNATS database to > separate them from bug reports? No!!!! That gdb-patches database should be deleted. It's dead. People already have to track: - gdb@ - gdb-patches@ - gnats@ and that is to complicated for some. At least, by having both patches and bugs in a single database, we've a one stop-shop. A better change is to dump gdb-patches@ > TBH, I've been avoiding it because I don't know the slightest thing > about the h8300 and it seemed like someone (I don't remember who - > MichaelS maybe?) did. If I'm wrong then one of us is just going to > have to suck it up and learn about the h8300... yay, another project. No worse than having me review them. All that can be done is review them at a coding / broad architectural level and assume that the contributor, given that they are using the target, have it working. Knowing that they run the testsuite also helps. Andrew