> "Jim" == James E Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Jim> Appropriate info should be added here:
Jim> http://gcc.gnu.org/codingconventions.html#upstream
Jim> This is where we keep track of such things.
Thanks, I'll fix this when I get back from my trip.
Tom
> "Joe" == Joe Buck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Joe> Cool; does this mean that the amount of code built by a gcc bootstrap
Joe> will decrease? Or will the combined libgjc/Classpath code still be all
Joe> included in the gcc distribution.
It will all still be in there. It is just a differenc
David Daney wrote:
Recently we experienced the Big-Classpath-Merge. Now most of the source
code for libgcj is maintained in the Classpath project and periodically
copied into the GCC CVS repository.
Appropriate info should be added here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/codingconventions.html#upstream
On Thu, Jul 28, 2005 at 12:17:26PM -0700, David Daney wrote:
> Recently we experienced the Big-Classpath-Merge. Now most of the source
> code for libgcj is maintained in the Classpath project and periodically
> copied into the GCC CVS repository.
Cool; does this mean that the amount of code bui
Hi,
On Thu, 2005-07-28 at 12:17 -0700, David Daney wrote:
> The consensus from the gcj IRC seems to be that a copyright assignment
> for Classpath is now necessary for contributions to the parts of libgcj
> that are maintained by Classpath. This also means that said patches
> should be checked
