This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Why not gnat Ada in gcc?
- To: geoffk at geoffk dot org, law at redhat dot com
- Subject: Re: Why not gnat Ada in gcc?
- From: dewar at gnat dot com (Robert Dewar)
- Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 07:36:39 -0500 (EST)
- Cc: dewar at gnat dot com, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, kenner at vlsi1 dot ultra dot nyu dot edu,rth at cygnus dot com
<<However, I do believe that ACT should follow the same rules as other
developers. In particular, there's a general policy:
If you have several unrelated changes, you should check them in
with separate cvs commit commands.
that each patch, as submitted to gcc-patches and as committed to the
tree, should not include multiple unrelated features or bug fixes.
This makes it possible for those reviewing patches, trying to isolate
a single bug fix, trying to isolate a single bug introduction,
regression testing, or trying to use the CVS history to do this
effectively.
>>
Yes, we are of course perfectly aware of these procedures, what gave you
or anyone else the idea that we planned not to follow them?