From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id 0BraK5gC7mOKVzUAWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Thu, 16 Feb 2023 05:16:56 -0500 Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id B048A1E222; Thu, 16 Feb 2023 05:16:56 -0500 (EST) Authentication-Results: simark.ca; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; secure) header.d=sourceware.org header.i=@sourceware.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=default header.b=kWkEekN2; dkim-atps=neutral X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on simark.ca X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, RDNS_DYNAMIC,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 Received: from sourceware.org (ip-8-43-85-97.sourceware.org [8.43.85.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EC3951E110 for ; Thu, 16 Feb 2023 05:16:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03DC73858031 for ; Thu, 16 Feb 2023 10:16:52 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 03DC73858031 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1676542612; bh=DLWIfzzEEKR0d2WyMn1zebIq/7wf+PGI/CQBTqYTnPk=; h=Date:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe: From:Reply-To:From; b=kWkEekN2wCR1UqAwI18yRyE5+JnULc7g472fXGdn4CCf+Jh0O2LbpxLulc3v8bk3/ 1q5fVWZIyVWaWr2fxUYHxz/lJdBpCG/LHJ8ZZQKg5TDLMZUNJjbQEi9dvaLdqiXikn bIqTdohUmEZdhO9fbRqLoUwv8QWKDM28uC+OIQcY= Received: from mail-wr1-x42d.google.com (mail-wr1-x42d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::42d]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0F3C7385800A for ; Thu, 16 Feb 2023 10:16:25 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 0F3C7385800A Received: by mail-wr1-x42d.google.com with SMTP id by3so1302521wrb.10 for ; Thu, 16 Feb 2023 02:16:24 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=DLWIfzzEEKR0d2WyMn1zebIq/7wf+PGI/CQBTqYTnPk=; b=hqxoj3ZgBFN5y+mnj82rDQaZ9cBAzm+dhx7YC9919R3COmeSZG1I6aYggBzUqKJ+RC jrhxr/DfKAZFenzxPsTJUGTnSm0sqs0Xqgv07Wi/XX0ZDekW0S9mQWAQ/HtUGiXtWYX7 rwzdCn0ZKhU9ueCmXgsfE9rBVSOrERX4xp2Q/GPylhxmqoIr4TOvOldWutjg6kMfrkUy SyfwW/33BIMkXYJj/LG2og3PaCw1bnOV/WJor0hv/0PV+JBOrh2slNrIToetqfiKzlyy XVm148JnyaS06gYJxEQ1PJAWLqQSmtROCt4CvHhYWo5k3RbhhHFos9+SYIqspQPI4t8x hRYg== X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKXHOE4D/RHt5mazh1TNM5yoCDujgG3pHcbXTF53yPlXpOZIgbe/ ShWS9M2HBGEuR7kvy1I3XCwG X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set/FSiFvv3Hv2crLZCqJBA+Tw8MHE3Kcjj6anXvOw0JWv7YWt+8KYAkfJrBuWzG/2nve5miJbQ== X-Received: by 2002:adf:f80d:0:b0:2c5:46d1:69e1 with SMTP id s13-20020adff80d000000b002c546d169e1mr4860801wrp.36.1676542583703; Thu, 16 Feb 2023 02:16:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from takamaka.gnat.com (lfbn-reu-1-488-54.w92-130.abo.wanadoo.fr. [92.130.77.54]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id i11-20020a05600c290b00b003e215973a96sm889087wmd.16.2023.02.16.02.16.23 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 16 Feb 2023 02:16:23 -0800 (PST) Received: by takamaka.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 2DA2C81E85; Thu, 16 Feb 2023 14:16:21 +0400 (+04) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2023 14:16:21 +0400 To: Mark Wielaard Cc: Andrew Burgess , Joel Brobecker , Luis Machado , Simon Marchi , Simon Marchi via Gdb Subject: Re: Any concrete plans after the GDB BoF? Message-ID: References: <87mt5kunum.fsf@redhat.com> <20230212124345.GH2430@gnu.wildebeest.org> <87r0utu6ew.fsf@redhat.com> <65409b73-fc6d-9a89-3541-31eb1a0b0791@arm.com> <87bklxtx7r.fsf@redhat.com> <7112932f-4260-2f33-e619-c7130e0abb20@arm.com> <87zg9fkmt4.fsf@redhat.com> <20230216095159.GD6028@gnu.wildebeest.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20230216095159.GD6028@gnu.wildebeest.org> X-BeenThere: gdb@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Joel Brobecker via Gdb Reply-To: Joel Brobecker Errors-To: gdb-bounces+public-inbox=simark.ca@sourceware.org Sender: "Gdb" > Yes. What I really like is that email based discussions of patches > makes it a real conversation about what we are doing. So I don't want > to loose that. I really feel this is missing the point of what I am trying to explain. I agree, email discussions make it a real conversation. But that's not the *only* way to have a conversation about a patch. GitHub is one example of that, where code-specific comments can be sent, and more general discussions can also occur at the same time. This requirement is not difficult to fullfil. What I can understand people being after (at least what I initially mourned) is the convenience of receiving an email when something new happened, and the convenience of being able to just reply to that email to send their comment. But I have found in practice that following the link provided in the email is inconsequential, and in return, the web interface opens doors to lots of things one cannot do with a simple email. There are not a whole lot of hosting platforms out there, so my concern is that, by making email integration a requirement, you're automatically eliminating a number of solutions which could answer your requirements just as well, only just differently, and from there, lose some great features out there. -- Joel