PROPOSAL: Alternate policy for obsoleting targets

[Nathanael Nerode]

Here's a more modest proposal.

All target triples which are 'believed to work', at least somewhat, 
must be listed in the manual.  This will be done in the section for 
target-specific notes, which I hereby volunteer to rewrite and update. 
:-)

(I use the terminology 'believed to work' to avoid the word 'supported'.  
Better terminology is welcomed.)

It's perfectly OK for wildcard targets a la 'i[456789]86-*-*' to be in 
this list if we really believe that they work. :-)

After my first-pass rewrite (which will be based on config.gcc), I will 
call for people to volunteer targets which I left out, and targets on 
this list which actually aren't believed to work.  After a few cycles of 
this, and presumably before the release of 3.4, we'll have a 'complete list'.

Anything not on this list is immediately marked obsolete and removed.

Adding support for a target *requires* adding it to this list.

Removing support for a target *requires* removing it from this list.

--
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.

If nobody steps up to the plate within 3 months, the target is obsoleted 
and then removed.

--Nathanael