Re: Linux vs. libio

[Joe Buck <jbuck at synopsys dot COM>]

Mark Mitchell writes:

> I assumed that "blanket write privs" applied to everything you get
> when you do a `cvs co egcs', which includes libio and libstdc++.

My opinion:

Blanket write privs are for the purpose of checking things in to CVS.
Actually doing a release is another matter: for anything that affects
other projects, the Steering Committee would have to be involved,
and the SC tries to run by consensus, meaning that if Ulrich Drepper
were extremely unhappy about something, the SC wouldn't approve its
release.

But remember, we never promised that we wouldn't break things in
*snapshots*.  That's too much of a constraint.

> But, there's still a question remaining: are people with blanket write
> privs allowed to change libio/libstdc++ without your approval, or not?
> And, for that matter, it appears that Gabriel Dos Reis is also listed
> as a maintainer of "c++ runtime libs" as well, so may I assume that
> even if approval is required, Gaby's approval is good enough?

I think we need a compromise between measures that would slow down
development too much, and measures that would break things for users.  I
think that the glibc folks should approve patches in the libraries with
ABI-visible effects before they go to release branches, but we shouldn't
need to wait for such approval to check something into the CVS archive.
After all, some problems won't be detected until people test snapshots
anyway.