Re: [Gdbheads] proposed change to GDB maintainership rules

[Jim Blandy]

Richard Stallman <address@hidden> writes:

>     Having said that, I would say that, if the rules proposed had been in
>     place for the last year, then GDB 6.0 would have had better support
>     for C++ nested types and namespaces, and that it would also have had
>     non-user-visible changes to improve its maintainability
> 
> Off-hand I would not say this is a terrible problem--especially if
> some of them are being installed now.  I suppose the maintainers had
> some reason not to want to install that code as it was written.

You're assuming that the maintainers had reviewed the patch, but
didn't quite like it.  But simply getting patches reviewed in the
first place takes too long.  This is a bottleneck we think our
proposal would improve.