This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Unreviewed patch
- From: Anthony Green <green at redhat dot com>
- To: tromey at redhat dot com
- Cc: kaz Kojima <kkojima at rr dot iij4u dot or dot jp>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, java at gcc dot gnu dot org, joern dot rennecke at superh dot com, Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at redhat dot com>, GCC Hackers <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: 12 Jun 2003 08:16:43 -0700
- Subject: Re: Unreviewed patch
- Organization: Red Hat, Inc.
- References: <200306121332.h5CDWGJ10519@r-rr.iij4u.or.jp> <87u1av8jrb.fsf@fleche.redhat.com>
On Thu, 2003-06-12 at 07:15, Tom Tromey wrote:
> Hopefully some more qualified person out there will
> speak up (and we'll end up with a libffi entry in MAINTAINERS).
>
> I believe we've agreed in the past that port maintainers can make
> port-specific libffi changes. So I think you can check in your fix on
> that basis.
The situation is a little frustrating because it's not made explicit in
the MAINTAINERS file. I once tried to clear this up with the SC through
one of its members, but got no reply.
My suggestion is that the following people should be able to approve
libffi changes:
0. Global maintainers
1. GCC port maintainers, since many times they will be the only ones who
understand the asm code.
2. Tromey, as the maintainer of libgcj, since this is an important part
of it.
3. Me, as the original author.
BTW - I think we should also add MAINTAINERS entries for zlib, boehm-gc
and fastjar.
AG
--
Anthony Green <green@redhat.com>
Red Hat, Inc.