From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31928 invoked by alias); 23 Feb 2003 23:26:18 -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 31921 invoked from network); 23 Feb 2003 23:26:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO walton.kettenis.dyndns.org) (62.163.169.212) by 172.16.49.205 with SMTP; 23 Feb 2003 23:26:17 -0000 Received: from elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org (elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org [192.168.0.2]) by walton.kettenis.dyndns.org (8.12.6/8.12.5) with ESMTP id h1NNQCjt000427; Mon, 24 Feb 2003 00:26:12 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from kettenis@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org) Received: from elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h1NNQCsY000717; Mon, 24 Feb 2003 00:26:12 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from kettenis@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org) Received: (from kettenis@localhost) by elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org (8.12.6/8.12.6/Submit) id h1NNQBr9000714; Mon, 24 Feb 2003 00:26:11 +0100 (CET) To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [maint] The GDB maintenance process References: <20030217180709.GA19866@nevyn.them.org> From: Mark Kettenis Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 23:26:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: Daniel Jacobowitz's message of "Mon, 17 Feb 2003 13:07:09 -0500" Message-ID: <86isvao9yk.fsf@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org> X-SW-Source: 2003-02/txt/msg00504.txt.bz2 I mostly agree with Daniel here. We have too many single points of failure. I still have testsuite patches sitting in my tree, dating months back since they were never approved. Similarly, Daniel probably has been held back more than once since I wasn't able to review threads-related patches in a timely fashion. I think we should allow our global maintainers to approve patches even for parts of GDB where we have a specific maintainer, if they feel they have the necessary expertise. Mark