Re: [Gdbheads] proposed change to GDB maintainership rules

[Ian Lance Taylor]

Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> writes:

> > 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.
> 
> And how would you propose to resolve such a problem?

I don't have a proposal.  Each situation is different.  I certainly
don't know enough about this one.

I've already been involved in one situation where the maintainers
could not come to a consensus, and it lead to the gcc/egcs split.
That is probably the worst possible solution, although it turned out
OK after a couple of years.  Making it turn out OK involved an
enormous amount of time on the part of several individuals who worked
steadily to try to resolve the issue.  I recommend against this
approach.

Ultimately the FSF owns gdb.

Ian