Richard Biener <[email protected]> writes:
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2026 at 4:28 PM Jeffrey Law
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 3/23/2026 9:53 PM, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
>> > On Tue, 3 Mar 2026, Andrew Pinski wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Tue, Feb 24, 2026 at 4:09?AM Richard Sandiford
>> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >>> OK to install?  I've reattached the patch just in case.
>> >> Ok.
>> > Do I get this right: *Richard Sandiford* needs to ask for ok on
>> > *rtl-ssa*?
>> Technically yes, and largely my fault I believe.  I know Richi and I
>> touched on the topic a while back and I was going to bring it to the
>> steering committee.  But I can't remember if I ever did that.  With
>> Richard S. retiring it's largely moot.
>
> Why should it be moot?  I suppose it's entirely up to Richard S. to
> accept or decline any offered role.

FWIW, I don't mind either way.  I can review other people's work under
global reviewership.  If people are happy reviewing my rtl-ssa stuff,
then IMO it's better to keep the status quo, since peer review is good :)
But if people would prefer not to have "unmaintained" parts of the code
base and want there to be at least one rtl-ssa maintainer, then I wouldn't
mind being one.

Thanks,
Richard

Reply via email to