Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
"Vladimir N. Makarov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
I've been lobbying for some time, on IRC, for more people to be able
to fill in the holes in the maintainership patterns. Most of the
existing global maintainers are inactive. There are areas of the code
which are not covered by the other maintainership groupings. Thus
there are areas where patches go unreviewed. I believe, though I have
not been told, that non-algorithmic global maintainer is intended to
address this gap. Making me one of the people with that role is most
likely following the principle that the person who complains gets the
job.
Ian, may be I am wrong but I see a problem that some important for all
GCC community things are discussed only on IRC. Not all people are on
IRC. Moreover some people avoiding the IRC for some reasons.
There will always be private conversations about GCC. You can't
prevent that. IRC is less private than other places.
When I said lobbying, I meant only that I complained about it. I
could have complained about it in e-mail the same way. There were no
important conversations about it on IRC. If the SC members use IRC at
all, they don't use #gcc.
I'm having a hard time interpreting your comments because I don't
understand what you want to be done differently.
I am not against IRC. We have free speech right (which means some
responsibility too). We could (and we do) discuss whatever we want
wherever we want with whom we want. I just wish that some discussion
important for all community were discussed not only IRC because they
involve not only people who are on IRC.
Speaking only for myself, I think it would be silly to stop using IRC.
I don't think it would work for the SC to conduct their deliberations
in public.
I don't like to see the deliberation in public too (it would be a
nightmare for developers ego). But I'd like to see a bit more
motivation and explanation in the SC decisions. Then you would not have
to write the first your message in this thread.
I do think that the SC membership should change from time
to time, but I have no concrete proposal for how to make that happen.
I do think that there should be more active global maintainers, but
the SC appears to disagree. I do think that the gcc is extremely
successful as free software projects go, which is not to say that it
can not be improved.
I am agree that GCC is successful especially as a community project.
But with my point of view, we could do better to serve our users (and
customers)
Please, just look at those charts
https://vmakarov.108.redhat.com/nonav/spec/comparison.html
The compilation speed decrease without a performance improving (at least
for the default case) is really scary. I'd like to see sticking to the
decision that every next release should be better. Although I don't
have ideas for now how to achieve this.
And of course, I just speak for myself too.
