This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: Thoughts on gcc maintainership and project merging

From: Zdenek Dvorak <rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni dot cz>
To: Andrew Pinski <pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu>
Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, gp at suse dot de, mark at codesourcery dot com, stevenb dot gcc at gmail dot com, roger at eyesopen dot com
Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 21:15:11 +0200
Subject: Re: Thoughts on gcc maintainership and project merging
References: <20060524144734.GA27367@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> <102383E2-0FA1-41AA-AC15-1ABBD35C68D4@physics.uc.edu>

Hello,

> On May 24, 2006, at 7:47 AM, Zdenek Dvorak wrote:
> >Obviously, there is no perfect solution for this problem.  However,  
> >here
> >are several ideas for proposals that I believe could help:
> >
> >1) ....
> >
> >   Proposal:  Whenever a new pass or a major functionality is added to
> >	      gcc, a maintainer for it must be found.  Preferably the
> >	      author, or in case he from some reason is not considered
> >	      suitable, some other person must be assigned.
> 
> This one seems to be already accpeted as the correct practice
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2006-04/msg00554.html

however, it seems not to work yet; who is maintainer for see.c, for
example?

Zdenek

References:
- Thoughts on gcc maintainership and project merging
  - From: Zdenek Dvorak
- Re: Thoughts on gcc maintainership and project merging
  - From: Andrew Pinski

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]