This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-developers@cygwin.com
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
RE: committers?
- From: "Robert Collins" <robert dot collins at itdomain dot com dot au>
- To: "Robert Collins" <robert dot collins at itdomain dot com dot au>,<cygwin-developers at cygwin dot com>
- Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2002 09:13:27 +1000
- Subject: RE: committers?
It would help if my email parsed.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert Collins
> Sent: Saturday, April 20, 2002 8:23 AM
> To: cygwin-developers@cygwin.com
> Subject: committers?
>
>
> Chris,
> I'm confused. You have, on a fairly often basis,
> lamented the fact that no-one other than you and Corinna
> seems to take responsibility for reviewing cygwin patches and
> changes. You seem to be indicating that you want more input
> into cygwin. Yet when I do just that, on a patch that is
> certainly not harmful (while maybe not optimal)
(please insert)
I find I've overstepped the mark..
> .I didn't
> realise I was overstepping boundaries when I checked it in,
> so I'd appreciate it if you could restate those so I don't do
> so in future.
>
> >If one of the functions is obsolete, it should be deleted.
> That means
> >that the patch does *not* look good. It needs to be reviewed.
>
> Fine, back it out (as you did). That's not a big deal. Just
> to be clear: I'm not upset that the patch was reverted,
> simply confused.
>
> Rob
>
>