This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: Please post patches to the mailing list
- From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at false dot org>
- To: Nick Clifton <nickc at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Fred Fish <fnf at specifixinc dot com>, binutils at sourceware dot org
- Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2005 09:29:42 -0400
- Subject: Re: Please post patches to the mailing list
- References: <20050529214729.GA32713@nevyn.them.org> <42A02B9D.5090604@redhat.com>
On Fri, Jun 03, 2005 at 11:06:21AM +0100, Nick Clifton wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
>
> >I for one find it much more convenient if all patches pass through this
> >mailing list. Otherwise, there's no way I'll ever see them, nor many of
> >the
> >other developers who read this list. For instance, there's a bunch of
> >unnecessary duplication in the latest bfd/addr2line patch; not necessarily
> >worth going back to fix now, but it could have been caught in review.
> >
> >What do others think? Nick, if this is awkward for you, obviously, ignore
> >it - you'd be the most affected.
>
> Oh I agree that the patches should go through at least one of the
> mailing lists.
>
> I was under the impression however that all binutils bugzilla updates,
> patches, etc were being forwarded to the bug-binutils@gnu.org list. Are
> you not subscribed to this list ?
I gave up reading bug-binutils before we started using Bugzilla.
It looks like the quality of the list has improved somewhat since then
:-) Perhaps I'll go back to reading it.
I'm still inclined to have all patches go through one list rather than
two - take bug-binutils as a parallel to gcc-bugs, and binutils as a
parallel to gcc and gcc-patches. But I don't feel half so strongly
about it now. So I'll just pick up another list folder.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC