From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14999 invoked by alias); 21 Feb 2003 23:43:34 -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 14992 invoked from network); 21 Feb 2003 23:43:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (172.16.49.200) by 172.16.49.205 with SMTP; 21 Feb 2003 23:43:34 -0000 Received: from redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 254532EF9; Fri, 21 Feb 2003 18:48:12 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3E56BABB.3080706@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003 23:43:00 -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: Jim Blandy Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [maint] The GDB maintenance process References: <20030217180709.GA19866@nevyn.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-02/txt/msg00489.txt.bz2 > I was talking to a friend of mine about the way GDB is run, and he was > amazed that we give individual people complete power, and complete > responsibility, for sections of code. Everyone is going to be wrong > sometimes, he said, and it's easy to protect against, without being > too bureaucratic. Interesting spin. I think the concept such as `the Buck stops' and having the final decision, are very different to `complete power'. The former is about responsibility. A maintainer, who is a member of a larger team, takes on certain responsibilities, such making the final decision when reviewing a patch. The maintainer is assumed to have sufficiently good judgment, however, they are also assumed to be taking on board the comments and suggestions being made by their peers. Andrew