On 06/28/2011 08:51 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 2:47 PM, Bernd Schmidt<ber...@codesourcery.com> wrote:
I think it's great that Richard was appointed. I also understand Vlad's
frustration and can't imagine why he isn't RA maintainer.
On 06/28/11 14:39, Richard Guenther wrote:
We discussed the maintainer appointing process at the London GCC
Gathering event, a summary can be looked up at the pdf attached
to http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/GCCGathering2011 (the "Community" section).
So, what are we going to actually do about it?
I think we started suggesting more maintainers / reviewers to the SC
and the appointments will slowly tickle in. If that works to our
satisfaction we do nothing (apart from proposing more people - the idea
was to broaden the area people can review patches and appoint more
reviewers - based on the fact that those reasonable people know when
to back off and not approve patches in areas they do not know).
So, I suggest you suggest Vlad as IRA maintainer to the SC, and I
would support that suggestion. Gerald, can you forward this suggestion?
Bernd and Richard, I'd like thank you for generous support of me. But
the email was mostly not about my frustration. I raised several
questions relative to the decision:
* ambiguity of the decision. What does RTL optimizers/RTL maintainer mean?
* about contradiction to the policy. If SC decided to change their
policy, why did not they informed us?
* appointments are technical decisions and it should be not in
jurisdiction of SC.
* quality of SC decisions.
