This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: GNU C Library master sources branch, release/2.15/master, updated.glibc-2.15-33-g3e5bea0
- From: Carlos O'Donell <carlos_odonell at mentor dot com>
- To: Andreas Jaeger <aj at suse dot com>
- Cc: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>,<libc-alpha at sources dot redhat dot com>
- Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 09:45:14 -0400
- Subject: Re: GNU C Library master sources branch, release/2.15/master, updated.glibc-2.15-33-g3e5bea0
- References: <20120625214410.9972.qmail@sourceware.org> <4833526.UaGCj6ilVb@byrd> <Pine.LNX.4.64.1206261020140.588@digraph.polyomino.org.uk>
On 6/26/2012 6:20 AM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Jun 2012, Andreas Jaeger wrote:
>
>> I really think we should take the commit date to the branch and not the
>> date when this was committed to head. This is the usual practice for
>> head and it makes sense for branches IMO as well.
>>
>> Could you cleanup the changelog, please?
>
> I've followed the existing practice Carlos has followed on the branch,
> e.g. <http://sourceware.org/ml/glibc-cvs/2012-q2/msg00642.html>.
>
For backports I've been backporting *everything* and making it look as
if it had been applied to the branch at the time it was on Master.
If other people have an opinion, please speak up now and we can have
an informed discussion.
Cheers,
Carlos.
--
Carlos O'Donell
Mentor Graphics / CodeSourcery
carlos_odonell@mentor.com
carlos@codesourcery.com
+1 (613) 963 1026