Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 16:11:13 -0800 (PST) From: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> To: "Greg 'groggy' Lehey" <grog@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: Scott Long <Scott_Long@adaptec.com>, Nate Lawson <nate@root.org>, Olivier Houchard <cognet@FreeBSD.ORG>, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: RE approval needed? (was: cvs commit: src/sys/i386/conf GENERIC) Message-ID: <200212170011.gBH0BDDB082118@apollo.backplane.com> References: <6100BCEB85F8E244959C756C04E0EDD161CC18@otcexc01.otc.adaptec.com> <20021217000712.GT97271@wantadilla.lemis.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
:> Most commits to HEAD do not need explicit approval from re@ at this
:> time.
:
:I can't recall seeing a statement about this. Did I miss one? In any
:case, it would be nice to know a better definition of "most commits".
:
:Greg
:--
:See complete headers for address and phone numbers
I interpreted the RE announcement about HEAD unfreezing to mean
"commits to HEAD that you think might interfere with the release
process should still get approval". Or something of that order.
-Matt
Matthew Dillon
<dillon@backplane.com>
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200212170011.gBH0BDDB082118>