On 11-06-28 09:02 , Vladimir Makarov wrote:
Bernd and Richard, I'd like thank you for generous support of me. But
the email was mostly not about my frustration. I raised several
questions relative to the decision:
* ambiguity of the decision. What does RTL optimizers/RTL maintainer mean?
Anything related to RTL, in my view. As much as possible, I would lean
towards flexible definitions of maintenance boundaries. If we make them
too inflexible, this will not help reviews (many patches cross some
boundary in trivial ways).
We should trust maintainers/reviewers to know their own boundaries and
decide whether a patch touches too many areas they don't feel
comfortable reviewing. This has happened many times in the past, with
no negative consequences. So, reviewers are by and large DTRT.
* appointments are technical decisions and it should be not in
jurisdiction of SC.
* quality of SC decisions.
So, according to what we discussed in London, the SC will essentially
not make appointment decisions. We will recommend them, and they will
agree. If we find unreasonable resistance, we will then see what to do
about that.
Diego.
