From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 35DD238582B7 for ; Thu, 31 Aug 2023 10:34:28 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 35DD238582B7 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1693478067; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: references:references; bh=SCUT3h1T3fsNtagscLIPda2NBP3NgXWDf6BMIZJapKk=; b=d8RKP6aK8KnK7LdeMwAoRG8Q5Q0P0q7ypoePCBmlDxOeTmkqKIV1jTzNYL1khiQVvN7I26 khZE89dEsdUu57W3PovGF2zMTBc4ejbyFEg/IoLLPFgrKAFqh0KUwVK+dXoPPboJtWOtlA aX5fKd4floAYHEU1+qIjZ0fT550DI9w= Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mimecast-mx02.redhat.com [66.187.233.88]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-32-kc48banLPluad8orspyVHA-1; Thu, 31 Aug 2023 06:34:21 -0400 X-MC-Unique: kc48banLPluad8orspyVHA-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx07.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.7]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 04F35858290; Thu, 31 Aug 2023 10:34:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from oldenburg.str.redhat.com (unknown [10.2.16.31]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DC07E140E950; Thu, 31 Aug 2023 10:34:19 +0000 (UTC) From: Florian Weimer To: Alexandre Oliva via Libc-alpha Cc: "Carlos O'Donell" , Alexandre Oliva , Jakub Jelinek , Andreas Schwab , Joseph Myers , Maxim Kuvyrkov Subject: Re: [Action Required] glibc decision to use CTI services. References: Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2023 12:34:18 +0200 Message-ID: <87edjjcxg5.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.1 on 10.11.54.7 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE,TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: * Alexandre Oliva via Libc-alpha: > Even then, this would IMHO be a move for GNU to decide, or at the very > least be consulted on, according to its own values and priorities, > something that all mantainers appointed by GNU, myself included, > committed ourselves to observe, prioritize and uphold as maintainers of > GNU packages. I encourage other maintainers to justify their responses > based on GNU's values and priorities, as they understand them. I'm not sure why =E2=80=9CGNU=E2=80=9D should have a say in this (whatever = this is, you do not quote enough context). How would that even work? I think we don't have consensus what GNU's current decision-making structure looks like. I'm also puzzled why this was sent to the glibc stewards. The main task of this group these days seems to be to forward submissions to the stewards to libc-alpha. That doesn't seem to be very useful. Thanks, Florian