On Monday 23 November 2009 05:20:22 Rob Landley wrote: > On Sunday 22 November 2009 21:26:56 Mike Frysinger wrote: > > On Sunday 22 November 2009 22:19:47 Austin Foxley wrote: > > > First step towards sanity: Let me commit the nptl_merge branch to > > > master. If you haven't looked at it, I've got all the relevant changes > > > for nptl grouped into related commits, and it's up to date with master > > > as of today. > > > > > > I'm going ahead with Step 1 in a day or so, unless someone yells > > > loudly. > > > > i would like to go through it first, at least as a "fresh set of eyes". > > i dont want to see more accidental merge commits throwing out good code. > > More code review's always nice, but it's been pending for three years now. > Couldn't a fresh set of eyes go through it as easily after the merge as > before?
it hasnt been put up for merging before. so either you can review the pending branch, or you can sit back and wait. -mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ uClibc mailing list [email protected] http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/uclibc
