This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-developers@cygwin.com
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
RE: System-wide mutexes and pthreads
- From: "Robert Collins" <robert dot collins at syncretize dot net>
- To: "'Conrad Scott'" <Conrad dot Scott at dsl dot pipex dot com>
- Cc: <cygwin-developers at cygwin dot com>
- Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2002 21:32:26 +1000
- Subject: RE: System-wide mutexes and pthreads
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Conrad Scott [mailto:Conrad.Scott@dsl.pipex.com]
> Sent: Friday, 14 June 2002 8:59 AM
> > Submit patches for any bits you are 100% happy with - that
> won't need
> > further tweaking.
>
> I'm not sure whether you mean "submit" or "commit" here? If you mean
> "submit", it doesn't seem that I've much need for CVS write
> access at all.
Here's the process:
A) hack on the branch
B) Decide that feature foo is ready for release (i.e. won't destabilise
HEAD, and is not going to change in such a fashion as to break ABI in
the future.
C) Submit a patch, based on the HEAD->branch delta, to implement foo in
HEAD, whilst leaving all alpha and beta code in the branch.
> Also, to check the interpretation of "100% happy": those cygserver/shm
> patches I sent earlier this week, what category would they
> fall into?
Most would be 100% happy IMO. The debug consolidation one, I've got some
longer term ideas as discussed, but is probably 100% ok as well.
> My
> feeling is that they don't add new features or change anything of the
> fundamental design, they could be committed directly. Or am I
> out of line
> here?
Nope. Just fine.
Rob