From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-return-8324-listarch-gdb=sourceware.cygnus.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 25749 invoked by alias); 8 Apr 2002 14:32:44 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 25582 invoked from network); 8 Apr 2002 14:32:42 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO touchme.toronto.redhat.com) (216.138.202.10)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 8 Apr 2002 14:32:42 -0000
Received: from toenail.toronto.redhat.com (toenail.toronto.redhat.com [172.16.14.211])
	by touchme.toronto.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 6B714B8013; Mon,  8 Apr 2002 10:32:42 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from bje@localhost)
	by toenail.toronto.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g38EWfR26427;
	Mon, 8 Apr 2002 10:32:41 -0400
From: Ben Elliston <bje@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <15537.43529.140988.838892@toenail.toronto.redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2002 07:32:00 -0000
To: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com>
Cc: Nick Clifton <nickc@redhat.com>,
	Andrew Cagney <ac131313@redhat.com>,
	Geoff Keating <geoffk@redhat.com>,
	Chris Demetriou <cgd@broadcom.com>,
	"Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@redhat.com>, gdb@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [maint] sim and common
In-Reply-To: <3C85A44B.6090403@cygnus.com>
References: <3C85A44B.6090403@cygnus.com>
X-SW-Source: 2002-04/txt/msg00093.txt.bz2

>>>>> "Andrew" == Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com> writes:

  Andrew> I'm wondering if it would be helpful for sim specific
  Andrew> maintainers (at least for sim/common based sims) to have
  Andrew> implicit approval/write permission on the sim/common
  Andrew> directory.

Why do you feel it would be helpful?  I don't think there has been any
evidence that patch approvals for sim/common has been a bottleneck or
indeed even a problem for anyone to date.

  Andrew> Which reminds me, Stephane Carrez should really be listed as
  Andrew> the m68hc11 maintainer.  Unless, that is, GDB is going to
  Andrew> assume that a GDB target maintainer implicitly maintains the
  Andrew> corresponding SIM.

I'm happy enough with that idea, provided that there is a mechanism
for people to be listed explicitly as sim maintainers, overriding the
corresponding GDB maintainer for that port.  There are potential sim
maintainers who are capable of working on the sim but might not be
willing/able to work on GDB as well.

Ben