Re: [Gdbheads] Steering Committee nominations

[David Carlton]

On 18 Feb 2004 08:09:04 +0200, Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> said:

> IMVHO, we should try to exclude active GDB maintainers from the
> committee.  Given the fallout from the incident(s) that led to these
> discussions, I think the committee's membership should be as remote
> as possible from any doubts regarding their objectivity; including
> people some of whom were involved in the kind of personal conflicts
> that led to this would go against that, IMHO.

I see a couple of potential problems with excluding GDB maintainers
from the committee:

* As Ian pointed out, it's sometimes important for the steering
  committee to have a feel for the effects of changes on GDB's source
  code.  For example, I don't see how the GCC steering committee would
  have been able to decide whether or not to merge tree-ssa into GCC
  3.5 without that sort of data.  So, while I certainly wouldn't want
  to require all SC members to follow gdb-patches, I think it would be
  bad if none of them understood the details of changes, which
  probably in practice means that several (most?) of its members
  should be active developers.

* I think there will be authority problems with the SC if none of its
  members are active GDB developers.  GDB is a volunteer project; it's
  hard to get volunteers to follow orders if the people making those
  orders don't have authority coming from their actions within the
  project, not just from their presence on a list somewhere.

David Carlton
address@hidden