This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Unreviewed patch
- From: Gerald Pfeifer <pfeifer at dbai dot tuwien dot ac dot at>
- To: Anthony Green <green at redhat dot com>,Joern Rennecke <joern dot rennecke at superh dot com>
- Cc: tromey at redhat dot com, 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,Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at redhat dot com>, GCC Hackers <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 17:40:36 +0200 (CEST)
- Subject: Re: Unreviewed patch
- References: <200306121332.h5CDWGJ10519@r-rr.iij4u.or.jp> <3EE89AEE.452EC932@superh.com>
On Thu, 12 Jun 2003, Anthony Green wrote:
>> 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
>> 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.
That's unfortunate.
> 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.
Would you mind suggesting appropriate additions to the MAINTAINERS file?
I'll happily forward them to the SC and make sure to follow it.
On Thu, 12 Jun 2003, Joern Rennecke wrote:
> I'm somewhat unsure about the status of libffi. On the one
> hand it is a separate project, and as such it appears that only
> Anthony Green can approve patches.
> On the other hand the libffi home page says 'libffi is now largely
> maintained as part of GCC.' , and if it is actually maintained as
> part of GCC, that would mean that global and target port maintainers
> of gcc can approve patches.
The point is, is it largely maintained as part of GCC, or is it now
part of GCC (like, for example, libstdc++ and libgcj which became
fully integrated)?
Gerald
--
Gerald "Jerry" pfeifer@dbai.tuwien.ac.at http://www.pfeifer.com/gerald/