Re: [Gdbheads] Proposed poll on proposals

[David Carlton]

On 03 Feb 2004 01:02:34 -0500, Ian Lance Taylor <address@hidden> said:

> 1) Global maintainers are permitted to approve patches to any part
>    of gdb, even parts which have a specific area maintainer.

Yes.

> 2) If maintainers disagree on a patch, and can not resolve the
>    disagreement by discussion, the disagreement may be resolved by a
>    vote of all global maintainers and relevant area maintainers.

Yes.

> 3) Assign more area maintainers to areas for which patches are not
>    being reviewed fast enough.

Abstain - I'm not necessarily against this, but I don't see it as
urgent given #1.

> 4) Track patches using an automated system; permit global maintainers
>    to approve a patch if the relevant area maintainers have not acted
>    for N days, for some value of N.

No - I don't see the need for an automated system, and the global
maintainers should always have permission to approve patches.  (So I
guess it's okay if N = 0...)

> 5) Create an ombudsman for gdb, who is responsible for listening to
>    people's reports of problems, and then resolving them first through
>    the global maintainers, and then, if that fails, through the
>    steering committee.

No.  I don't have strong feelings against this; on the other hand,
it's probably my third favorite conflict resolution mechanism, so I'm
voting yes on the other two (#2, #6) and no on this.

> 6) Reconstitute the steering committee to make it more active and to
>    make it better reflect the gdb community.  Include people from
>    the gcc and binutils projects.  Perhaps do not include current
>    gdb maintainers, to permit more objectivity.

Yes on the first two sentences; no on the last sentence.

David Carlton
address@hidden