From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16123 invoked by alias); 8 Apr 2014 23:17:37 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 16006 invoked by uid 89); 8 Apr 2014 23:17:36 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-Spam-User: qpsmtpd, 2 recipients X-HELO: smtp.gentoo.org Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (HELO smtp.gentoo.org) (140.211.166.183) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Tue, 08 Apr 2014 23:17:35 +0000 Received: from vapier.localnet (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99D98340057; Tue, 8 Apr 2014 23:17:33 +0000 (UTC) From: Mike Frysinger To: gdb@sourceware.org Cc: Edjunior Barbosa Machado , Binutils , Peter Bergner , Tulio Magno Quites Machado Filho Subject: Re: Vendor branches on sourceware.org's binutils-gdb repo Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2014 23:17:00 -0000 Message-ID: <5147380.qGS8As6KbI@vapier> User-Agent: KMail/4.12.3 (Linux/3.13.0; KDE/4.12.3; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <53406399.9050303@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <53406399.9050303@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart2459731.AZJua0WOQm"; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2014-04/txt/msg00022.txt.bz2 --nextPart2459731.AZJua0WOQm Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-length: 891 On Sat 05 Apr 2014 17:12:09 Edjunior Barbosa Machado wrote: > at the time when binutils/gdb was moving to git, there has been some > discussion in the mailing list [1] about the possibility of hosting > vendor branches on sourceware.org's binutils-gdb git repository but, as > far as I understood, there has been no agreement about this policy. >=20 > We already maintain community vendor branches for glibc (on > sourceware.org) and gcc (on gnu.org), and we'd like to do the same for > binutils-gdb. The idea is to create separate namespaces, i.e. > ibm/gdb/7.7 and ibm/binutils/2.24. Those branches will only store > patches under GPL and with a proper copyright assignment. >=20 > Any comments? Objections? i'd use it for Gentoo if it were available. i've gotten all the gdb change= s=20 merged at this point (i just do random back ports), but binutils is another= =20 story ... -mike= --nextPart2459731.AZJua0WOQm Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-length: 836 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAABAgAGBQJTRIOSAAoJEEFjO5/oN/WBnZUP/A2uUshIzzYncXcxRku45RsA 2/QxW9KUfysDqnhiyAeGuCnWcHvvlRhsC5qzpeRP+z1hn/7bgOFBjMuftI3bnRA1 Ffe+QSu5jVyu4IJvCX/Li1US9HaktAeCnclNLijCxAe8FU/G+09cZwRKw8yRlDD4 oy0EFgJDuT6T4FsJrc0bGYTd6yYNM7PRq5V7Blav8dQoDOlIr31DQ74lCmAvlhu8 QIeZYJJJbUTGWTJ/jrWr32l00J8D447l+zkw/mprm4vJW4QLmVS9eClgU9EVx+HX +64KHBKGSy35wbJp+IEs+3CqOdqLtLFB7WqE7JI0GHpg4L8XwtmH42RvCa+E2Srw +w84MTYngvP0v5jK9kQX8IJXyx9QdStvZUJDilV7bniT7pAe4rB2+1SItAwZXsz2 vf9yQO78bDMezo0wVa7di6v5dJhm8PJ4rp0Q6kgnW3KV6ffW1Q89fbbTKPve1mrm Om2ijgFNadzyqPNR5dFkMO+3PLbw6afLSK+rNEyugZyftn6aqzue8+S0zcGzlleA OXSDlYX5Aw6AUkNcAKBuoJK4RqjzML4xT3TZfcg507TY/5B/HFFpNhTOKZi+xsRF qvv/j8TIwymofBXk2KqviX0Whxt/cD61KiDZdnmoQR3JZYmWGF+AhvlGRA/ILv1R wq4mM/xGYRzBN2tNX24G =a0Sd -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart2459731.AZJua0WOQm--