[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gdbheads] proposed change to GDB maintainership rules
From: |
David Carlton |
Subject: |
Re: [Gdbheads] proposed change to GDB maintainership rules |
Date: |
Wed, 28 Jan 2004 13:28:18 -0800 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.1002 (Gnus v5.10.2) XEmacs/21.4 (Rational FORTRAN, linux) |
On 28 Jan 2004 16:03:57 -0500, Ian Lance Taylor <address@hidden> said:
> 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.
Do you have examples of other projects that have used voting? I'd be
curious to hear what problems others have encountered, so we can try
to work around them.
> Consensus or tyranny are better methods.
What method does the GCC steering committee use to resolve
disagreements? I looked at the GCC web site, and as far as I can tell
their only formal conflict resolution mechanism consists of appealing
to the steering committee. And I couldn't figure out what that latter
process involves.
I would hope that voting would be used only rarely when working on
GDB, and that the vast majority of conflicts could be resolved via
discussion.
David Carlton
address@hidden
Re: [Gdbheads] proposed change to GDB maintainership rules, Michael Snyder, 2004/01/27
Re: [Gdbheads] proposed change to GDB maintainership rules, Ian Lance Taylor, 2004/01/28
- Re: [Gdbheads] proposed change to GDB maintainership rules,
David Carlton <=
Re: [Gdbheads] proposed change to GDB maintainership rules, Eli Zaretskii, 2004/01/29
Message not availableRe: [Gdbheads] proposed change to GDB maintainership rules, Ian Lance Taylor, 2004/01/29
Re: [Gdbheads] proposed change to GDB maintainership rules, David Carlton, 2004/01/29
Re: [Gdbheads] proposed change to GDB maintainership rules, Jim Blandy, 2004/01/29