Re: [Gdbheads] proposed change to GDB maintainership rules

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Jim Blandy <address@hidden>
> Date: 03 Feb 2004 01:28:55 -0500
> 
> I don't think Andrew Cagney is well-suited for the tyrant's position.

While I agree to a large extent with Jim's observations, I feel that
his conclusions are somewhat extreme.  For example:

> Andrew is very poor at explaining himself.

I wouldn't say ``very poor'': it's sometimes not easy to understand
what Andrew means, but ``very poor'' suggests that the situation is
extremely bad, which IMHO it isn't.

> Andrew is poor at taking technical criticism into account.  He often
> seems unable to understand points people raise.

Same here: ``often'', in particular, is too extreme.

And there are other examples; essentially every place where Jim tried
to make a generalized conclusion out of concrete examples, I find the
conclusions too extreme, even far-fetched.

I realize that Jim tried to make a point, which could have encouraged
him to present a somewhat extreme picture, but I think the point could
have been well taken even without that.