This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: RFC: Rename Non-Autpoiesis maintainers category
On 7/30/07, Diego Novillo <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On 7/27/07 9:58 AM, Zdenek Dvorak wrote:
> > Hello,
> >> I liked the idea of 'Reviewers' more than any of the other options.
> >> I would like to go with this patch, unless we find a much better
> >> option?
> > to cancel this category of maintainers completely?
> An interesting idea, but let's discuss that issue separately. In this
> thread I'm only interested in changing the name of this category. Not
> discuss whether the category should exist at all.
> Since I have not heard any strong opposition to changing the category
> name to 'Reviewers', I will go ahead with this patch later this week.
> Index: MAINTAINERS
> --- MAINTAINERS (revision 126951)
> +++ MAINTAINERS (working copy)
> @@ -231,7 +231,7 @@
> maintainers need approval to check in algorithmic changes or changes
> outside of the parts of the compiler they maintain.
> - Non-Autopoiesis Maintainers
> + Reviewers
> dataflow Daniel Berlin email@example.com
> dataflow Paolo Bonzini firstname.lastname@example.org
> @@ -251,10 +251,9 @@
> Fortran Paul Thomas email@example.com
> -Note that individuals who maintain parts of the compiler as
> -non-autopoiesis maintainers need approval changes outside of the parts
> -of the compiler they maintain and also need approval for their own
> +Note that individuals who maintain parts of the compiler as reviewers
> +need approval for changes outside of the parts of the compiler they
> +maintain and also need approval for their own patches.
Now that the name has been changed to reviewer, I think
the following wording is slightly better:
While reviewers can approve the changes in the parts of the compiler
they still need approval of their own patches from other maintainers
> Write After Approval (last name alphabetical
#pragma ident "Seongbae Park, compiler, http://seongbae.blogspot.com"