From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.cs.ucla.edu (mail.cs.ucla.edu [131.179.128.66]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B4F7C3858C78 for ; Wed, 6 Sep 2023 19:02:52 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org B4F7C3858C78 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=cs.ucla.edu Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cs.ucla.edu Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 367CD3C00D1FD for ; Wed, 6 Sep 2023 12:02:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.cs.ucla.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.cs.ucla.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10032) with ESMTP id YBAE9KHZNAuE for ; Wed, 6 Sep 2023 12:02:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id F06583C00D183 for ; Wed, 6 Sep 2023 12:02:51 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.10.3 mail.cs.ucla.edu F06583C00D183 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cs.ucla.edu; s=9D0B346E-2AEB-11ED-9476-E14B719DCE6C; t=1694026972; bh=mZUCrBUONLLdOBDTjDbrN4GebF1f7uYkmxBVyew0ZZ8=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:To:From; b=ouoO46ngTmxK32NEWnkh2DTzmIEk4WxFiG7lGYhfONL1515Q6fsXVoX21j/LT8mZD rWfwPAq18rEVCF3BfocVjm/UrKVF0DyVDSpkugpwhzjXgeM7gisl35f7MnOBXYAXSE NldiU/7ppJ+hXHMddEZjTnl2+30MsPooVtftRYAuRKk7ccnmRdftsTHOqw5eppQZxY LTxtJxVe7Kw0qzoUdNrR2aalZnzOrbF7vskPWMoP3mckEyODE9zPNMGVle0AsXdbhi tYxHSjZjfhpxRIcH8XOXXCx6fEl6iIUbE1G0YBUFuLvWeqkIdFE5bH4HPAd4Rh7Aj0 unY3Ij8je39Qw== X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mail.cs.ucla.edu Received: from mail.cs.ucla.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.cs.ucla.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id X2EqBzfkD7kc for ; Wed, 6 Sep 2023 12:02:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.9] (cpe-172-91-119-151.socal.res.rr.com [172.91.119.151]) by mail.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D0AE63C00D1FD for ; Wed, 6 Sep 2023 12:02:51 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2023 12:02:51 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.15.0 Subject: Re: GNU C Library as its own CNA? Content-Language: en-US To: libc-alpha@sourceware.org References: <1f5a1295-36d1-ab5e-86ec-1e91acefc63f@gotplt.org> <8f303953-3e5e-582f-ab4b-d3d0911f3be2@gotplt.org> <8222787b-f534-a827-ebf5-d9100844228d@gotplt.org> From: Paul Eggert Organization: UCLA Computer Science Department In-Reply-To: <8222787b-f534-a827-ebf5-d9100844228d@gotplt.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,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: On 2023-09-06 11:57, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote: > > Are you implying that the decision to become a CNA (or not) has to be > taken by the GNU maintainers and that volunteers from the glibc > community cannot self-organize and do that? In practice this sort of thing has been decentralized (one might even say "disorganized"...) and I don't think there's any requirement by the GNU project that it be centralized. It's merely a matter of what's better for users and maintainers.