PROPOSAL: Variation on an Alternate policy for obsoleting targets

[Bruce Korb <bkorb at veritas dot com>]

In the interests of keeping fixinc from becoming a monotonically increasing
behemoth, I propose the following addition:

> Now for the actual obsolescence rule. :-)
> 
> Any target which has significant custom code (for instance, its own 
> subdirectory or file under config/) requires a maintainer.  This is 
> most of them.
> 
> Any such target without a maintainer is advertised as needing one.

Maintainers would make at least one build with a GCC_MAINTAINER_MODE
environment variable set.  fixinc would detect that in the build and
record the machine triplet/quadruplet and the set of fix tests and
fixes that got applied during the build.  That information would get
pasted into the test results and mailed in.  This would provide a
means for determining some of the fixes that are not being used anymore.
This would also ensure that maintainers were at least monitoring GCC's
progress.  :)

 - Bruce