From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24584 invoked by alias); 11 May 2004 23:46:45 -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 24576 invoked from network); 11 May 2004 23:46:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 11 May 2004 23:46:43 -0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i4BNkh0o002406 for ; Tue, 11 May 2004 19:46:43 -0400 Received: from localhost.redhat.com (to-dhcp51.toronto.redhat.com [172.16.14.151]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i4BNkhv27716; Tue, 11 May 2004 19:46:43 -0400 Received: from gnu.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBC922B9D; Tue, 11 May 2004 19:46:45 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <40A165E5.2070805@gnu.org> Date: Tue, 11 May 2004 23:46:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-GB; rv:1.4.1) Gecko/20040217 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cgd@broadcom.com Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: GDB 6.1.1 References: <407C486B.9000706@gnu.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004-05/txt/msg00072.txt.bz2 http://sources.redhat.com/gdb/current/onlinedocs/gdbint_15.html#SEC133 15.2 Branch Commit Policy The branch commit policy is pretty slack. GDB releases 5.0, 5.1 and 5.2 all used the below: * The `gdb/MAINTAINERS' file still holds. * Don't fix something on the branch unless/until it is also fixed in the trunk. If this isn't possible, mentioning it in the `gdb/PROBLEMS' file is better than committing a hack. * When considering a patch for the branch, suggested criteria include: Does it fix a build? Does it fix the sequence break main; run when debugging a static binary? * The further a change is from the core of GDB, the less likely the change will worry anyone (e.g., target specific code). * Only post a proposal to change the core of GDB after you've sent individual bribes to all the people listed in the `MAINTAINERS' file ;-) Pragmatics: Provided updates are restricted to non-core functionality there is little chance that a broken change will be fatal. This means that changes such as adding a new architectures or (within reason) support for a new host are considered acceptable.