From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4625 invoked by alias); 19 Feb 2003 22:53:43 -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 4618 invoked from network); 19 Feb 2003 22:53:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (172.16.49.200) by 172.16.49.205 with SMTP; 19 Feb 2003 22:53:42 -0000 Received: from redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7370F2ED1; Wed, 19 Feb 2003 17:58:27 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3E540C13.2010403@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 22:53:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20030217 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Christopher Faylor Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [maint] The GDB maintenance process References: <20030217180709.GA19866@nevyn.them.org> <3E53B2E0.2070801@redhat.com> <20030219223928.GB8779@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-02/txt/msg00383.txt.bz2 > Has anyone taken the time to go through the list of outstanding patches > and categorize them by maintainership? Already done, see the bug database. Mind you only very recently but I think we're already seeing results. > I'm wondering if this is just a problem with a couple of maintainers > being unresponsive. > > For instance, as a not-so-wild guess, I'd say that the symtab part of > gdb frequently falls behind. That may be because there are more > symtab-related patches being supplied or it could be that I'm just > imagining things. There are more symtab patches but, thanks to one maintainer, they are moving. Not sure about other categories, some do appear stalled :-( > If there are some maintainers who just aren't responsive enough, for > whatever reason, then the simple expedient of adding another maintainer > for that specific part of gdb might go a long way towards fixing the > backlog. There is responsive and then there is reliable :-/ Andrew