Re: [Gdbheads] proposed change to GDB maintainership rules

[Ian Lance Taylor]

> From: Kevin Buettner <address@hidden>
> Subject: Re: Gdb committee meeting
> Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2003 23:47:40 -0700

> Specifically, we propose that the "Various Maintainers" section of
> GDB's MAINTAINERS file be replaced by the following:
> 
>   All non-obvious patches to GDB must be approved.  Area maintainers
>   can approve patches to the relevant area of GDB; global maintainers
>   are treated as if they are area maintainers for all areas of GDB.
>   Maintainers are permitted to approve their own patches in areas
>   where they have authority to approve others' patches.
> 
>   If maintainers disagree whether or not a patch should be approved,
>   and can't resolve that disagreement via discussion, it shall be
>   resolved by a vote.  Any global maintainer or area maintainer for
>   the relevant area can vote; a majority of votes cast is required for
>   approval.

I'm not a gdb maintainer, but I do have a comment.  I don't think
voting is a particularly good approach for maintaining a GNU program.
Consensus or tyranny are better methods.  If it is impossible for the
relevant maintainers to come to a consensus, and if the tyranny
becomes unacceptable, then there is a problem with the current set of
maintainers.  Voting on a particular patch will not eliminate that
problem.  It will just paper over it for a time.  Perhaps that is the
intent.

Also, the sentence ``All non-obvious patches to GDB must be approved''
is not worded very well.  It might be better to say ``All non-obvious
patches to GDB require approval.''

Ian