[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gdbheads] proposed change to GDB maintainership rules
From: |
Elena Zannoni |
Subject: |
Re: [Gdbheads] proposed change to GDB maintainership rules |
Date: |
Tue, 3 Feb 2004 15:46:25 -0500 |
Eli Zaretskii writes:
> > From: Elena Zannoni <address@hidden>
> > Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 12:29:05 -0500
> >
> > I was able to contact the steering committee. I am 100% certain that
> > if you had chosen to do the same you would have succeeded.
>
> The problem is not to contact the committee, the problem is to get
> them to act. As a data point, consider this: until now, unless I'm
> mistaken, only one of them took any part in this discussion (apologies
> if I missed somebody).
At the phone conference back in December, 3 SC members dialled in,
plus Andrew and Jim. Other two have been participating here, and Stan
and Jim signed the proposal. Seems to me that they are active. My
guess is that they are watching. I suspect they might have been more
willing to get involved if the matter had evolved a bit differentely.
- Re: [Gdbheads] proposed change to GDB maintainership rules, (continued)
- [Gdbheads] steering committee, David Carlton, 2004/02/03
- Re: [Gdbheads] steering committee, Elena Zannoni, 2004/02/03
- Re: [Gdbheads] steering committee, Michael Snyder, 2004/02/03
- Re: [Gdbheads] proposed change to GDB maintainership rules, Jim Blandy, 2004/02/03
- Re: [Gdbheads] proposed change to GDB maintainership rules, Andrew Cagney, 2004/02/03
- Re: [Gdbheads] proposed change to GDB maintainership rules, Michael Snyder, 2004/02/03
Re: [Gdbheads] proposed change to GDB maintainership rules, Elena Zannoni, 2004/02/03
Re: [Gdbheads] proposed change to GDB maintainership rules, Ian Lance Taylor, 2004/02/04