From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24370 invoked by alias); 13 Jan 2004 01:16:39 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 24363 invoked from network); 13 Jan 2004 01:16:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-out3.apple.com) (17.254.13.22) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 13 Jan 2004 01:16:38 -0000 Received: from mailgate2.apple.com (a17-128-100-204.apple.com [17.128.100.204]) by mail-out3.apple.com (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i0D1Gcou013780 for ; Mon, 12 Jan 2004 17:16:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from relay1.apple.com (relay1.apple.com) by mailgate2.apple.com (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.3.6) with ESMTP id ; Mon, 12 Jan 2004 17:16:38 -0800 Received: from [17.201.24.57] (polskifiat.apple.com [17.201.24.57]) by relay1.apple.com (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i0D1GcrY011850; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 01:16:38 GMT In-Reply-To: <1073955693.3458.187.camel@minax.codesourcery.com> References: <90200277-4301-11D8-BDBD-000A95B1F520@apple.com> <200401130118.27506.s.bosscher@student.tudelft.nl> <200401130140.09367.s.bosscher@student.tudelft.nl> <0A2511CD-4563-11D8-B7FE-000393673036@apple.com> <1073955693.3458.187.camel@minax.codesourcery.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v609) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: <30B70FA6-4566-11D8-B7FE-000393673036@apple.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Geoff Keating , Steven Bosscher , gcc@gcc.gnu.org, Phil Edwards From: Ziemowit Laski Subject: Re: gcc 3.5 integration branch proposal Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 01:16:00 -0000 To: Mark Mitchell X-SW-Source: 2004-01/txt/msg00773.txt.bz2 On 12 Jan, 2004, at 17.01, Mark Mitchell wrote: >> In my opinion, one of the duties of the RM (currently Mark) is to >> devise >> architectural solutions to accommodate such idiosyncracies in the same >> source base. > > This discussion is rapidly degenerating. > > Let's wrap it up and get back to work. > > For the record, though, I don't view it as part of my duties as RM to > come up with any sort of design plans for GCC. That would be fun, and > it is in some other context's my job, and I suppose the FSF could > conceivably appoint some kind of design planner, but they haven't, and > if they did it might very well not be me! While I can't argue with the veracity of your claim, I must say I find it downright bizarre. How can one oversee the productization of something as complex as gcc without an understanding of -- and control over -- its architecture? Unless, of course, productization is not in your job description either... :-) > Somehow, we're taking in this down some route where it's Apple vs. the > FSF, which is silly since I didn't criticize Apple. I'm not arguing against anyone. I was merely trying to explain why people why not be as enthused about fixing remaining 3.4 bugs as you might want them to be. --Zem -------------------------------------------------------------- Ziemowit Laski 1 Infinite Loop, MS 301-2K Mac OS X Compiler Group Cupertino, CA USA 95014-2083 Apple Computer, Inc. +1.408.974.6229 Fax .5477