On Thu, 18 May 2023, Richard Sandiford via Gcc wrote: > It would be more usual to wait a bit longer until someone becomes > maintainer. But IMO that's only sensible when there's an existing > maintainer to cover the interim.
Not questioning YunQiang's overall coding skills I'd be concerned about following the GNU Coding Standards though, as based on his submissions so far I'm not convinced of his experience in this area. I would expect a maintainer to meet the highest standards here. I have a feeling our overall quality verification has become sloppier recently and I do wish all the maintainers were as meticulous as you were when reviewing my MIPS patches years if not decades ago. I do hope it wasn't just because you considered me so good as to be able to adhere to the high standards while for other people we just have to accept what we have been offered. NB I'll do the MIPS16e2 feature review myself, exceptionally, as I was a member of the team developing this ISA extension and also did the binutils part, so I feel somewhat responsible for it and want GCC support for it to meet the usual quality standard GNU software has built its reputation on. Maciej
