Re: (forw) Re: [Gomp-discuss] Release candidate

[Lars Segerlund]

 I'm not much for commiting the savannah cvs ... unless someone knows a good 
way around removing directories and such in cvs :-) ...

 We got a bit too much junk and a poor structure in the savannah cvs i think.

 / Lars Segerlund.


On Tue, 2 Nov 2004 16:03:28 +0100
Jacob Weismann Poulsen <address@hidden> wrote:

> This was meant to go to the list:
> 
> ----- Forwarded message from address@hidden -----
> 
> To: Biagio Lucini <address@hidden>
> Subject: Re: [Gomp-discuss] Release candidate
> Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 14:09:20 +0100
> Message-ID: <address@hidden>
> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1+cvs20040105i
> X-Editor: Vim  http://www.vim.org/
> X-Mailer: Mutt http://www.mutt.org/
> X-Accept-Language: da en
> 
> * Biagio Lucini <address@hidden> [2004-11-02 13:13]:
> > Hi Jacob, thanks for your comments.
> > 
> > On Tuesday 02 November 2004 12.55, Jacob Weismann Poulsen wrote:
> > >
> > > 2) As to the content of libgomp I made a few early experiments
> > > that wasn't meant to make its way to the official tree. The
> > > reason is simply that I didn't really think about the structures
> > > nor the implementation and as Scott has said on several occasions
> > > (and I think that we all agree on this), we better base the
> > > implementation on some kind of design document. I would recommend
> > > that the initial commit will take its offspring in the contents
> > > at the savannah CVS instead or in version 1.1 of the files in the
> > > cvs-ball that I mailed you and Scott a long time ago (if I recall
> > > it right - it seems to be ages ago).
> > >
> > 
> > Well, this has been debated quite a lot. I was sharing your opinion at the 
> > beginning, but Diego sort of convinced me that this is not the case, since
> > having gomp into some branch of gcc will help us to get visibility and to 
> > receive more comments from other people and get more people involved too. 
> 
> Sorry - my comment wasn't clear. I totally agree that we should go
> into the branch of gcc NOW and the stuff at savannah should be dropped
> ASAP. However, I am not convinced that my playing (the content of the
> tarball that is on your webpage) is a good start off point. That is, maybe
> we should make the initial commit at bit more vanilla that it appears to 
> be now. One possible attempt of such a vanilla commit would be to take the 
> content of the savannah CVS and commit it instead. Just a suggestion. Maybe 
> it does not matter that much - it will hopefully be severly modified within
> a short time.
> 
> Cheers, Jacob
> 
> -- 
> Jacob Weismann <address@hidden>
> Fingerprint: 9315 DC43 D2E4 4F70 3AA8  F8F0 9DA0 B765 F5C8 7D26
> 
> ----- End forwarded message -----
> 
> -- 
> Jacob Weismann <address@hidden>
> Fingerprint: 9315 DC43 D2E4 4F70 3AA8  F8F0 9DA0 B765 F5C8 7D26
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gomp-discuss mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gomp-discuss