Re: Clean gnumach code - MachRevival
Hi, well bug-hurd is not properly the right place to discuss this, but I'll keep this discussion public in case someone is interested. On 1/30/06, Matheus Morais <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm a bit confuse about how mach revival project will work in some aspects. The "Revival Project" is quite an informal thing. It has born as a Sergio Lopez's idea mainly, which apparently seems very busy recently. You won't find anything `official`, if this is what you want/like. > I'm on the task to clean up gnumach code and I already made some progress > removing warnings from compile proccess, as gianluca said, but I have no > idea where I must post/show/give/upload these modifyed files. You already asked me what to do, and I told you already that I was very busy in this period -- university, other code, work, preparing to leave Europe in 2 months, etc. -- so I don't have much time in the immediate to work on this. In a few days I'll have more time, still if you want to help me organizing the stuff you're _welcome_. > Maybe I must > create a patch for them? Can anyone, involved on the project, could give me > a clue about how this will work? > Well, you sent me already the patches. As soon as I'll make a repository/site or something for it, I'll put it as a first cleanup of the code. That's what I can do as 'clean up subproject' volunteering leader. If you -- for fame and glory? :-) -- want to post a patch on savannah, that has nothing to do with the revival project, and still a great thing. > After project done a new branch for gnumach will be created? Don't think so. Quite frankly, I don't get the point of your mail. You already asked me privately about this, and you know that the cleanup thing is (unfortunately) organized by me. If you fear that my lack of time at the moment might make your work a waste, just ignore the whole cleanup revival stuff and work on cleaning up the Mach independently. This would, in fact, still be a great thing, since we'd got people working on cleaning up the mach code, and that is what we wanted. Now, let's get back to the important stuff, thanks for your work! Gianluca -- It was a type of people I did not know, I found them very strange and they did not inspire confidence at all. Later I learned that I had been introduced to electronic engineers. E. W. Dijkstra ___ Bug-hurd mailing list Bug-hurd@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-hurd
Clean gnumach code - MachRevival
I'm a bit confuse about how mach revival project will work in some aspects. I'm on the task to clean up gnumach code and I already made some progress removing warnings from compile proccess, as gianluca said, but I have no idea where I must post/show/give/upload these modifyed files. Maybe I must create a patch for them? Can anyone, involved on the project, could give me a clue about how this will work? After project done a new branch for gnumach will be created? Thanks Matheus Morais ___ Bug-hurd mailing list Bug-hurd@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-hurd
Re: Clean gnumach code - MachRevival
Note that for fixes that are more advanced than adding some casts to get rid of compile-time warnings or similar, we'd like you to assign the copyright of your changes to the FSF. Papers are not needed (but nice to have) for GNU Mach. They are a must for the Hurd though. Or that is how I was told. ___ Bug-hurd mailing list Bug-hurd@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-hurd
Re: Clean gnumach code - MachRevival
On Mon, Jan 30, 2006 at 10:53:12AM -0200, Matheus Morais wrote: > I'm a bit confuse about how mach revival project will work in some aspects. Me too, so let's try to get this sorted out right now. http://hurd.gnufans.org/bin/view/Mach/GNUMachRevivalProject> gives a rough overview about what that effort is supposed to be. I don't know anything about the current state. > I'm on the task to clean up gnumach code and I already made some progress > removing warnings from compile proccess, as gianluca said, but I have no > idea where I must post/show/give/upload these modifyed files. Here, on this very mailing list. Imho there is no need for yet another mailing list which Gianluca thought about creating. > Maybe I must > create a patch for them? Posting patches would be a convenient way for us to review the fixes and finally apply them to the RCS, given there is a consensus among the participients of this mailing list. Note that for fixes that are more advanced than adding some casts to get rid of compile-time warnings or similar, we'd like you to assign the copyright of your changes to the FSF. > After project done a new branch for gnumach will be created? I don't see the immediate need for that, be it before or after ``the project is done''; under the assumption that GNU Mach remains to be GNU Mach w.r.t. interfaces to the Hurd, etc. Regards, Thomas ___ Bug-hurd mailing list Bug-hurd@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-hurd
Re: Clean gnumach code - MachRevival
On 1/30/06, Gianluca Guida <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi, Hey Gianluca well bug-hurd is not properly the right place to discuss this, butI'll keep this discussion public in case someone is interested. The "Revival Project" is quite an informal thing. It has born as a Sergio Lopez's idea mainly, which apparently seems very busy recently.You won't find anything `official`, if this is what you want/like.You already asked me what to do, and I told you already that I wasvery busy in this period -- university, other code, work, preparing to leave Europe in 2 months, etc. -- so I don't have much time in theimmediate to work on this. In a few days I'll have more time, still ifyou want to help me organizing the stuff you're _welcome_. Ok, I got it. Please, sorry if I bothered you in that period. ;~ Well, you sent me already the patches. As soon as I'll make arepository/site or something for it, I'll put it as a first cleanup of the code. That's what I can do as 'clean up subproject' volunteeringleader. If you -- for fame and glory? :-) -- want to post a patch onsavannah, that has nothing to do with the revival project, and still a great thing. Right now I will wait until the repository/site has been work/build to post the patches. The fame or glory are, really, not my target ;). As I said before I'm looking to contribute with GNU project and improve my skills. Don't think so.Quite frankly, I don't get the point of your mail. You already asked me privately about this, and you know that the cleanup thing is(unfortunately) organized by me. If you fear that my lack of time atthe moment might make your work a waste, just ignore the whole cleanuprevival stuff and work on cleaning up the Mach independently. This would, in fact, still be a great thing, since we'd got peopleworking on cleaning up the mach code, and that is what we wanted. I'm looking to work with the team, in fact, actually I have no knowledge and time enough to lead that kind of project alone. So, I will wait for instructions. Now, let's get back to the important stuff, thanks for your work! Gianluca Thanks Matheus Morais ___ Bug-hurd mailing list Bug-hurd@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-hurd
Re: Clean gnumach code - MachRevival
[...] but I have no idea where I must post/show/give/upload these modifyed files. For now, just post them here. Anyone who follows MachRevival also follows the action on GNU Mach. And patches that end up in GNU Mach will with most certanty end up in MachRevival. MachRevival will probobly contain some major reworkings of fundamental things, which might or might not end up in GNU Mach depending on how pretty they are. ___ Bug-hurd mailing list Bug-hurd@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-hurd
Re: Clean gnumach code - MachRevival
Hey, On 1/30/06, Matheus Morais <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Well, you sent me already the patches. As soon as I'll make a > > repository/site or something for it, I'll put it as a first cleanup of > > the code. That's what I can do as 'clean up subproject' volunteering > > leader. If you -- for fame and glory? :-) -- want to post a patch on > > savannah, that has nothing to do with the revival project, and still a > > great thing. > > Right now I will wait until the repository/site has been work/build to post > the patches. The fame or glory are, really, not my target ;). As I said > before I'm looking to contribute with GNU project and improve my skills. Well, that was clearly a joke. > I'm looking to work with the team, in fact, actually I have no knowledge and > time enough to lead that kind of project alone. So, I will wait for > instructions. Well, since we are among free people I suppose that "discuss together what to do" is what you meant by "wait for instructions". G. -- It was a type of people I did not know, I found them very strange and they did not inspire confidence at all. Later I learned that I had been introduced to electronic engineers. E. W. Dijkstra ___ Bug-hurd mailing list Bug-hurd@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-hurd
