"Vladimir N. Makarov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > For example, about latest appointments of Diego and Ian as GWP. They > are good guys but I don't see Diego actively working on RTL or Ian > actively working on tree-SSA.
Just for the record, I was already a full middle-end maintainer before the recent announcement, and (I assume) I retain that status. That is, I am permitted to make any reasonable change to the tree-ssa code, including an algorithmic change. My most recent patch was to the aliasing code, in the tree-ssa passes. That said, obviously I'm only going to make changes that I understand. I've been lobbying for some time, on IRC, for more people to be able to fill in the holes in the maintainership patterns. Most of the existing global maintainers are inactive. There are areas of the code which are not covered by the other maintainership groupings. Thus there are areas where patches go unreviewed. I believe, though I have not been told, that non-algorithmic global maintainer is intended to address this gap. Making me one of the people with that role is most likely following the principle that the person who complains gets the job. I have no reason to believe that these appointments have anything to do with our employer. (On the other hand, I suppose I have no reason to believe that they don't.) I've been hacking gcc longer than most people, at five different companies, and I was a middle-end maintainer before I joined Google. Diego, while a comparative newcomer, has obviously been a significant force in gcc for several years. Ian
