On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 9:14 AM Richard Biener <richard.guent...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 16, 2025 at 7:06 PM Segher Boessenkool > <seg...@kernel.crashing.org> wrote: > > > > Hi! > > > > On Mon, Jun 16, 2025 at 11:41:37AM +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote: > > > > WaA is decided by the sourceware maintainers. The request form says > > > > "email address of person who approved request", but that is not who > has > > > > the final call :-) Which of course makes sense, the sourceware > > > > maintainers primarily need to keep their system safe and working! > > > > > > That is not how it works. > > > > We'll have to disagree then. > > > > > Technically of course sourceware overseers > > > could just randomly add or remove accounts. But I don't remember any > > > instance of that ever happening. > > > > And I never said that, that is a gross misrepresentation of my argument. > > I say they are the final authority on this. And that is true AFAICS. > > > > > > That is not how things work. The SC decides who does and does not > > > > become maintainer (reviewer is just a hobbled kind of maintainer, > there > > > > is no real difference). Maintainers for frontends, backends, > subsystems > > > > can recommend things, sure. But they have no separate authority, > there > > > > can not be fiefdoms. This is Good(tm). > > > > > > This case is Richard's proposal and I think it will lead to having > > > more active maintainers and reviewers precisely because currently the > > > SC is a bit stale and mostly not very active. IMHO the active > > > maintainers know best here and we don't need the SC for these kind of > > > decisions. > > > > I don't agree. If you want to topple the power structure we have for > > GCC you can try to do that, but what would be the point, other than > > getting more power into the hands of some other people? > > Agreed. In my perception one of the issue is that the SCs work is > intransparent, it's not controlled (like we don't have "elections" or > sth like that) and I do not see GCCs governance structure documented > clearly. I'm sure every SC member knows the latter by heart so I'd > welcome for one of them to improve the accessibility of that knowledge > by improving https://gcc.gnu.org/ - in fact I realize that the > information > how to contribute to GCC is scattered amongst different pages and the > toplevel org of gcc.gnu.org is far from perfect. > https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/gcc-steering-committee > > Richard. > > > > > > > Segher >
