This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: PATCH (gdb/mi)
- From: Nick Roberts <nick at nick dot uklinux dot net>
- To: gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2003 01:15:08 +0000
- Subject: Re: PATCH (gdb/mi)
> > Eli will probably tell you that you need to update the MI doc's.
> Thanks, that's a good catch. Yes, I should have told Nick that when
> I saw the patch.
I'll gladly do this but I thought that the patch needs to be approved first.
Secondly, I have signed no copyright assignment for GDB (maybe this change is
small enough not to need it). Finally the CONTRIBUTE file doesn't ask for
documentation to be included when submitting a patch.
Perhaps I've used the wrong subject header and it looks like the patch has
already been committed. My impression now is that:
RFC is for maintainers who ask for comments before committing their own patch.
RFA is for those with write after approval.
commit is for a patch that has been committed.
and, rather oddly
PATCH seems, generally, to be for a commit also.
Most people who post to this list have some kind of write access to the
repository. What subject header should someone without write authority use
when submitting a patch? Some projects have a patch database as well as one
for bugs. Would this be a good idea for GDB?
Nick