From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <SRS0=SD/f=BI=orcam.me.uk=macro@sourceware.org>
Received: from angie.orcam.me.uk (angie.orcam.me.uk [IPv6:2001:4190:8020::34])
	by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50C693858421
	for <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>; Fri, 19 May 2023 11:20:47 +0000 (GMT)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 50C693858421
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=orcam.me.uk
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=orcam.me.uk
Received: by angie.orcam.me.uk (Postfix, from userid 500)
	id 638FE92009D; Fri, 19 May 2023 13:20:46 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by angie.orcam.me.uk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C90C92009B;
	Fri, 19 May 2023 12:20:46 +0100 (BST)
Date: Fri, 19 May 2023 12:20:46 +0100 (BST)
From: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@orcam.me.uk>
To: Richard Sandiford <richard.sandiford@arm.com>
cc: YunQiang Su <yunqiang.su@cipunited.com>, 
    "gcc@gcc.gnu.org" <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: Taking Over MIPS Maintenance
In-Reply-To: <mptlehmytb3.fsf@arm.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.21.2305190415170.50034@angie.orcam.me.uk>
References: <82560266-EAE3-4964-A399-322BFE9428FC@cipunited.com> <mptlehmytb3.fsf@arm.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (DEB 202 2017-01-01)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3488.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,KAM_DMARC_STATUS,KAM_INFOUSMEBIZ,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE,TXREP,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org
List-Id: <gcc.gcc.gnu.org>

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