public inbox for gdb@sourceware.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Siddhesh Poyarekar <siddhesh@gotplt.org>
To: "Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@redhat.com>,
	Overseers mailing list <overseers@sourceware.org>
Cc: Ian Kelling <iank@fsf.org>,
	gdb@sourceware.org, Mark Wielaard <mark@klomp.org>,
	libc-alpha@sourceware.org, binutils@sourceware.org,
	gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: Toolchain Infrastructure project statement of support
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2022 12:07:54 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <0bac951e-8f5e-deb6-c126-26d5fbd0bbfe@gotplt.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20221023151640.GA8034@redhat.com>

On 2022-10-23 11:16, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
> Hi -
> 
>> [...]  Given that the current sourceware admins have decided to
>> block migration of all sourceware assets to the LF IT [...]
> 
> If you're trying to say that projects have not unanimously shown
> interest in moving infrastructure to LF IT, just say that.  Don't
> blame overseers.

I did not say that, although no project (barring maybe elfutils and 
systemtap, assuming that your and Mark's objection as overseers implies 
that you do not want to move to LF IT) has specifically *opposed* moving 
infrastructure to LF IT either.

To be specific, gcc steering committee and glibc FSF stewards have 
announced the decision for their projects, Nick announced for binutils 
that he supports moving to LF IT (with the caveat that he won't abandon 
sourceware, I assume that means he'd like to use sourceware as a mirror 
or something similar) but gdb folks have been silent so far.  Given how 
gdb and binutils are coupled, the gdb conversation really needs to 
happen at some point.  From private conversations with folks from the 
gdb community, it seems to me that they're primarily avoiding getting 
into this public spat.

I am not aware of any opposition from maintainers of libabigail or 
cygwin or any other active sourceware based project over moving either, 
but I haven't had any links to those projects, so I may be uninformed.

> If you're trying to suggest that overseers, contrary to our repeated
> public statements, wish to block all migration, that is untrue and you
> will need to retract this.

Here's a more precise statement: Two of the overseers are leaders of 
projects hosted on sourceware and three overseers (including those two) 
have stated clearly on multiple occasions that transitioning to LF IT is 
off the table, effectively announcing their decision on behalf of 
projects they lead.  It is hence clear that the overseers have 
effectively blocked full migration of sourceware to LF IT.

Sid

  reply	other threads:[~2022-10-23 16:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <2513b668-9ebd-9e78-7263-dc24f4a9558a@redhat.com>
2022-10-13 18:25 ` Christopher Faylor
2022-10-14 12:33   ` Siddhesh Poyarekar
2022-10-17 15:10   ` Mark Wielaard
2022-10-17 16:11     ` Siddhesh Poyarekar
2022-10-18  9:50       ` Mark Wielaard
2022-10-18 15:17         ` Siddhesh Poyarekar
2022-10-18 16:42           ` Christopher Faylor
2022-10-18 18:13             ` Siddhesh Poyarekar
2022-10-18 18:14               ` Siddhesh Poyarekar
2022-10-18 18:47                 ` Paul Smith
2022-10-21  0:33               ` Alexandre Oliva
2022-10-23  8:59           ` Ian Kelling
2022-10-23 13:27             ` Siddhesh Poyarekar
2022-10-23 15:16               ` Frank Ch. Eigler
2022-10-23 16:07                 ` Siddhesh Poyarekar [this message]
2022-10-23 16:32                   ` Siddhesh Poyarekar
2022-10-23 17:01                   ` Jeff Law
2022-10-23 22:35                     ` Christopher Faylor
2022-10-23 17:09                   ` Frank Ch. Eigler
2022-10-23 17:38                     ` Jeff Law
2022-10-24  1:51                     ` Siddhesh Poyarekar
2022-10-23 20:57               ` Christopher Faylor
2022-10-23 21:17                 ` Siddhesh Poyarekar
2022-10-23 21:59                   ` Christopher Faylor
2022-10-24  1:29                     ` Siddhesh Poyarekar
2022-10-23 11:33       ` Ian Kelling
2022-10-23 16:17         ` Siddhesh Poyarekar
2022-10-23 18:56           ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
2022-10-23 21:19 ` Alexandre Oliva
2022-10-23 22:07   ` Christopher Faylor
2022-10-12 17:40 Carlos O'Donell

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=0bac951e-8f5e-deb6-c126-26d5fbd0bbfe@gotplt.org \
    --to=siddhesh@gotplt.org \
    --cc=binutils@sourceware.org \
    --cc=fche@redhat.com \
    --cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=gdb@sourceware.org \
    --cc=iank@fsf.org \
    --cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
    --cc=mark@klomp.org \
    --cc=overseers@sourceware.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).