[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH 0/6] Lex, Yacc and explicit declarations of dependencies.

From: Stefano Lattarini
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] Lex, Yacc and explicit declarations of dependencies.
Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2010 11:36:26 +0200
User-agent: KMail/1.12.1 (Linux/2.6.30-2-686; KDE/4.3.4; i686; ; )

At Tuesday 06 July 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> Hi Stefano,
> Please give me another week to review the series;
OK; but note that this message wasn't meant to hurry you: if this
change goes in automake, it's not gonna need a fast review, but rather
a careful one, even if it's slow (as is usually the case with careful
I just thought that the feature could be a reasonable candidate for a
new branch, which BTW would have given me a first opportunity to mess
around with remote branching and pushing without touching/endangering
the master/maint branches.
> for that, it
> shouldn't be necessary to post updated patches nor push a branch;
> I have your patches in an old branch sitting here.
Agreed.  But I think it would be a good idea anyway to edit the
ChangeLog of the [PATCH 2/6] to cite also Solaris 10 /usr/xpg4/bin/make
rather than only Heirloom make.
> If you haven't
> heard back from me by next Monday, then feel free to push a
> branch, but please rebase it against maint not master, if that is
> at all possible for the changes in this series.
Yes, it's definitely possibile.  But why maint?  I'm not so sure the
change should to be considered as maintainance/bugfixing only...

> > If I'm not mistaken, a remote branch can be deleted anyway in
> > the future (in case it turns out to be a dead end).
> Yes, that is true.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]