This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: Patch pinging

From: Paolo Bonzini <bonzini at gnu dot org>
To: NightStrike <nightstrike at gmail dot com>
Cc: David Edelsohn <dje dot gcc at gmail dot com>, "Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche at redhat dot com>, Manuel López-Ibáñez <lopezibanez at gmail dot com>, Tobias Burnus <burnus at net-b dot de>, Gerald Pfeifer <gerald at pfeifer dot com>, Ben White <ja_walker at sbcglobal dot net>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2010 12:44:11 +0200
Subject: Re: Patch pinging
References: <AANLkTimRPovANTXmj2WHsTjpWyZRjq05M0igERMkMIMY@mail.gmail.com> <4C0D4A26.6080703@oracle.com> <mcrwrua37qr.fsf@dhcp-172-17-9-151.mtv.corp.google.com> <4C0D5F0E.9030401@redhat.com> <4C0D616D.10809@oracle.com> <mcrfx0y35by.fsf@dhcp-172-17-9-151.mtv.corp.google.com> <4C0D9979.90603@sbcglobal.net> <alpine.LSU.1.99.1006271105190.9343@acrux.dbai.tuwien.ac.at> <4C271A9B.4030503@net-b.de> <AANLkTiljXmtKvtFjb5rxnvvAN5DDtK7JgqjTHuPur8oL@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTinhMTnZdnO_aS2EPWoCnonZCBMqtZCarxNWRzhn@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTikqUzEfSQi37raUwIGsnohNL_RPMEvfXRZPd5iq@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTilDM5ZJuq-hEIMIbBWZ1U8IpZpM1AyyF65TfD_N@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTimbBchrH_DeoTd3osBWe7DRcc8uvZbiGDfUBgHd@ mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTinDHzvhC12pMtRvpGa2hB9-dEi2pK-_aT1D7q47@mail.gmail.com> <y0m8w5w4f56.fsf@fche.csb> <AANLkTilVVCtS_4TBl8__QvpPa09m694n-P8npBKlAvdf@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTimD8rV3WJ8oYSMkzfmF12A2UP7D_qiLQ_ag4eno@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTimIDOCwL1szTSX7oHTOJ5V9gvz4bj_fU7PdMjr_@mail.gmail.com>

On 06/30/2010 09:43 PM, NightStrike wrote:

On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 3:24 PM, David Edelsohn<dje.gcc@gmail.com> wrote:

He understood your point very well.  That is why Frank said, "You
falsely presume zero vetting."


Maybe I didn't get the zero vetting part, then.  I thought I did, but
apparently not.  What does that mean in this context?  Google isn't
telling me.

It means that if you had said "John Doe" or "Jane Smith" Frank would have likely rejected your name as well.

Of course you could have given a plausible name or even a fake name that he would not recognize (e.g. in Italy "Mario Rossi" is frequently used this way), but at some point you have to trust the other person's good faith.

I don't know if anyone is using fake names in the FSF copyright list. I think the FSF would be *very* upset if that was the case, and might go as far as vetting the contributions of the user and removing them. If someone used a fake name when explicitly asked for a real name, why should I trust him to not violate copyright?

Paolo

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Patch pinging
  - From: Richard Kenner

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]