This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Bogus/outdated entries in MAINTAINERS
- From: "Mark Mitchell" <mark at codesourcery dot com>
- To: "Volker Reichelt" <reichelt at igpm dot rwth-aachen dot de>, <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Cc: <law at redhat dot com>
- Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 08:39:47 -0800
- Subject: Re: Bogus/outdated entries in MAINTAINERS
- Organization: CodeSourcery, LLC
- References: <200401141100.i0EB0osV023825@relay.rwth-aachen.de>
Ben Chelf is a former CodeSourcery employee.
He is not working for us any more, so I cannot speak to what he may or may
not be doing with GCC at the moment.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Volker Reichelt" <email@example.com>
Cc: <firstname.lastname@example.org>; <email@example.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2004 3:00 AM
Subject: Bogus/outdated entries in MAINTAINERS
> The end of the MAINTAINERS file bugs me for quite some time now.
> The last entries read:
> Peter Bienstman(?)
> Benjamin Chelf(?)
> Mark Galassi(?)
> It seems like GCC does not know who the maintainers are and that looks
> unprofessional to me. :-(
> These entries appeared with a patch from Jeff Law (looks like this was
> in EGCS's time):
> I also also had a look into Bugzilla and the ChangeLog files and found
> the following:
> * not a single trace of Mark Galassi
> * three bug reports of Peter Bienstman (1007, 1008, 1029), but nothing
> * Benjamin Chelf appears in the ChangeLogs in June/July 2000
> as "Benjamin Chelf <firstname.lastname@example.org>", but never again
> IMHO there's no reason at all to keep the first two in the MAINTAINERS
> Maybe one could at least move B. Chelf to an appropriate category.
> There are several more issues that also apply to inactive maintainers:
> * Do they still have a login? Having more logins than necessary might
> be a security risk.
> * Do we want to keep inactive maintainers in the file forever?
> Do we want to have a category like "former maintainer" or is the
> contributors file more appropriate?