From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23177 invoked by alias); 25 Oct 2002 14:48:44 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 23121 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2002 14:48:41 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (216.138.202.10) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 25 Oct 2002 14:48:41 -0000 Received: from redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9591D3D4A; Fri, 25 Oct 2002 10:48:39 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3DB959C7.6050807@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 07:48:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020824 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gdb@sources.redhat.com Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: [maint] New title for ``global write maintainer''? References: <3DB95391.10407@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2002-10/txt/msg00543.txt.bz2 [Please reply to gdb@ and remove gdb-patches@] [I sent this to the wrong list, replying with the lists adjusted] Hello, The current ``global write maintainer'' title is something of a misnomer. Unlike GCC, where a global write maintainer can an does approve any patch, the GDB global write maintainers have an understanding that they won't approve patches or directly make changes in areas where there is already a maintainer. Given the potential for confusion, I'm wondering anyone has a better title? The only one I've come up with so far is ``Council of Elders''(1) but apparently some countries don't treat their elders with respect and, hence, the term takes on less than plesant connitations :-( Another could be the Senate, .... Andrew