Re: Release Schedule issues and doubts

["Steven Bosscher" <stevenb.gcc@gmail.com>]

On 6/4/06, Richard Sandiford <richard@codesourcery.com> wrote:
> Even if it's not intended that way, your proposal is probably going to
> be interpreted at some stage as a way of punishing maintainers.

And what is wrong with that?  Maybe it would help clean up the long
list of maintainers who don't actually do any maintenance.  Then, at
last, you get a more fair picture of the number of
reviewers&maintainers that we really have. Maybe it turns out that
patches don't get reviewed not because there are not enough
maintainers, but not enough _active_ maintainers.

>  If by
> accepting a patch, you take on the responsibility of organising fixes
> for every problem that gets traced to that patch, there's going to be
> even less incentive to review the thing in the first place.

With power comes responsibility.  If you can't handle the
responsibility, you shouldn't accept the power.  Being a maintainer of
some part of the compiler should be more than just being listed in
MAINTAINERS.

Gr.
Steven