Re: MAINTAINERS policy question

[Andreas Jaeger <aj@suse.de>]

Mark Mitchell <mark@codesourcery.com> writes:

>> I interpret this so that if somebody maintains port X it only gives
>> check-in rights for config/X/*,
>
> That has been my interpretation as well.
>
> (I would extend it to documentation that affects X, config.foo files
> that affect X, and so forth, but certainly not, say, to the register
> allocator code just because the register allocator happens to have
> a bug that affects X.)

Based on your and Joseph's comments, I've made the appended patch for
our web pages.

If there is consensus on this, I'd like to get permission to commit
it.

I think the MAINTAINERS file needs no update - but we could add the
paragraph there also if people think it's needed,

Andreas

--- cvswrite.html.~1~	Thu Jul 26 16:10:30 2001
+++ cvswrite.html	Sun Sep 16 20:13:24 2001
@@ -98,7 +98,13 @@
   primary responsibility for ports, front ends, or significant hunks
   of code in the compiler.  These folks are allowed to make changes in
   code they maintain without going through any kind of approval
-  process.</dd>
+  process.
+
+  <p>
+  Maintainers of a port maintain the files in config/&lt;port&gt;/,
+  the configure fragments for the port, documentation for the port and
+  test cases for features or bugs specific to this port.  Port
+  maintainers do not have approval writes in other files.  </dd>
 
   <dt>Write after approval.</dt> <dd>This is folks that make regular
   contributions, but do not fall into one of the two previous

-- 
 Andreas Jaeger
  SuSE Labs aj@suse.de
   private aj@arthur.inka.de
    http://www.suse.de/~aj