From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23133 invoked by alias); 16 Apr 2005 21:37:21 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 23114 invoked from network); 16 Apr 2005 21:37:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO viper.snap.net.nz) (202.37.101.8) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 16 Apr 2005 21:37:17 -0000 Received: from farnswood.snap.net.nz (p209-tnt2.snap.net.nz [202.124.108.209]) by viper.snap.net.nz (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED5E34ADC2C for ; Sun, 17 Apr 2005 09:37:15 +1200 (NZST) Received: by farnswood.snap.net.nz (Postfix, from userid 501) id 0627562A9A; Sat, 16 Apr 2005 22:36:51 +0100 (BST) From: Nick Roberts Message-ID: <16993.34163.414589.888781@farnswood.snap.net.nz> Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 21:37:00 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: MI Maintanance X-SW-Source: 2005-04/txt/msg00110.txt.bz2 I don't pretend to know what is happening but I imagine some people are pretty pissed off. I don't want to detract from Andrew's considerable contribution in the past, but one monosyllabic Spanish word in two months doesn't seem adequate to ensure continued MI Maintanance. Focussing on the practical, is it possible to find new maintainers for this aspect of GDB? While I am fairly confident that my patches for MI won't harm or break GDB, I don't have the depth of knowledge of GDB yet, to review other peoples' patches. Given the new impetus that Apple have shown for GDB and that they clearly have the expertise, I wonder if they are willing to pick up the baton? Nick