From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16568 invoked by alias); 26 Jun 2007 18:34:05 -0000 Received: (qmail 16559 invoked by uid 22791); 26 Jun 2007 18:34:04 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mtagate8.de.ibm.com (HELO mtagate8.de.ibm.com) (195.212.29.157) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Tue, 26 Jun 2007 18:34:02 +0000 Received: from d12nrmr1607.megacenter.de.ibm.com (d12nrmr1607.megacenter.de.ibm.com [9.149.167.49]) by mtagate8.de.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l5QIXxhr482110 for ; Tue, 26 Jun 2007 18:33:59 GMT Received: from d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com (d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com [9.149.165.228]) by d12nrmr1607.megacenter.de.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v8.3) with ESMTP id l5QIXxBh1929240 for ; Tue, 26 Jun 2007 20:33:59 +0200 Received: from d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id l5QIXwRJ024190 for ; Tue, 26 Jun 2007 20:33:59 +0200 Received: from [9.145.137.24] (dev15760.de.ibm.com [9.145.137.24]) by d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id l5QIXued024166 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 26 Jun 2007 20:33:57 +0200 Message-ID: <46815BC2.9070204@de.ibm.com> Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 18:34:00 -0000 From: Markus Deuling User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.10 (X11/20070301) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Eli Zaretskii CC: Robert Dewar , pkoning@equallogic.com, jimb@codesourcery.com, eager@eagercon.com, stanshebs@earthlink.net, gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: What's an annex? stratum? References: <467D5FEF.7010900@eagercon.com> <467D6D1F.7090507@earthlink.net> <467D6FB8.4080909@eagercon.com> <468009EA.4040504@eagercon.com> <18048.5444.903092.843811@pkoning.equallogic.com> <20070625193135.GA6391@caradoc.them.org> <4680199F.7020906@adacore.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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: 2007-06/txt/msg00312.txt.bz2 Eli Zaretskii wrote: > That's not surprising: programmers don't like writing documentation as > much as they like writing code. That is one reason why gdbint.texinfo > is in such poor shape. > > In any case, if people here believe comments are a reasonable > substitute for documentation, perhaps I should from now on reject code > patches that do not explain themselves clearly, and do not contain > enough references to other related portions of GDB. > Maybe the process of getting a patch into mainline should be changed. Currently a patch without a proper Changelog has no chance. Maybe we should extend that and say a patch must have Changelog and one or two lines (or even moren) in documentation whenever reasonable. For example the guy that wrote the part for inferior function calls definitely wrote no doc :-) For my opinion GDB's Internal Manual is very important and should be cultivated much more. -- Markus Deuling GNU Toolchain for Linux on Cell BE deuling@de.ibm.com