From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4754 invoked by alias); 21 Feb 2008 19:02:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 4742 invoked by uid 22791); 21 Feb 2008 19:02:09 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from elasmtp-junco.atl.sa.earthlink.net (HELO elasmtp-junco.atl.sa.earthlink.net) (209.86.89.63) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 21 Feb 2008 19:01:49 +0000 Received: from [68.224.95.127] (helo=macbook.local) by elasmtp-junco.atl.sa.earthlink.net with asmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1JSGfx-0003R0-21; Thu, 21 Feb 2008 14:01:45 -0500 Message-ID: <47BDCA93.2040404@earthlink.net> Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2008 19:25:00 -0000 From: Stan Shebs User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Macintosh/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Nick Roberts CC: Daniel Jacobowitz , gdb@sourceware.org, Richard Stallman Subject: Re: New MI maintainer References: <20080219191222.GA10196@caradoc.them.org> <18363.14758.855327.355215@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> In-Reply-To: <18363.14758.855327.355215@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-ELNK-Trace: ae6f8838ff913eba0cc1426638a40ef67e972de0d01da940262964b99c8bb2b99db7e6b2943fa987350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2008-02/txt/msg00170.txt.bz2 Nick Roberts wrote: > The process behind these decisions is not open to me but it doesn't escape my > attention that Vladimir is now part of CodeSourcery, and that CodeSourcery have > at least one contract (with Ericsson) to work on Eclipse which uses GDB/MI in > its DSF plugin. I ask myself in whose interest this appointment is made. It's > certainly not the GNU project or the FSF. > One of the qualities we look for in a maintainer is the ability to keep a level head, and to tone down the flames rather than escalate when the situation is difficult. As we know from bitter experience, technical ability and knowledge is not sufficient. Nick, this kind of accusation is precisely the sort of thing that we want to keep out of the GDB development process - if there were fencesitters on the issue before now, do you think that your public insinuation of bad faith and incompetence is going to cause them to regard you more favorably? So while I don't myself expect an apology, you should think more about your goals and how you are most likely to achieve them. As for the decision process not being open, I note that almost nobody volunteers to have their job performance reviews and salary history be put out in public. But if a wouldbe maintainer were to do that, I suggest that the SC have the discussion about that person in public as well. Stan