This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [PATCH RFC] Protoize tui/*.c
- To: jtc at redback dot com
- Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] Protoize tui/*.c
- From: Stan Shebs <shebs at apple dot com>
- Date: Wed, 06 Dec 2000 14:18:50 -0800
- CC: Kevin Buettner <kevinb at cygnus dot com>, gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
- References: <1001116010703.ZM16390@ocotillo.lan> <1001206205525.ZM18972@ocotillo.lan> <5mn1e9nr1k.fsf@jtc.redback.com>
"J.T. Conklin" wrote:
>
> >>>>> "Kevin" == Kevin Buettner <kevinb@cygnus.com> writes:
> Kevin> FYI, the above changes have *not* been committed yet. It was
> Kevin> suggested (semi-)privately to me that it would be best to wait
> Kevin> for the maintainer(s) of these files to give their approval. I
> Kevin> have attempted to contact the maintainer privately, but have
> Kevin> had no response.
> Kevin>
> Kevin> What are the procedures that we should follow if a maintainer
> Kevin> appears to be MIA?
>
> I don't want to sound overly harsh, but perhaps TUI is an evolutionary
> dead end that should be cast adrift. It was integrated into GDB
> before it was ready, and in the two years since nothing has been
> done to fix it.
I agree. Specialized functionality like the TUI should be under the
same rules as targets - if it's unused and unmaintained, and nobody
speaks up for it, then we need to ask ourselves why exactly we're
keeping it around.
Stan