On Fri Apr 16, 2021 at 7:37 AM BST, Thomas Koenig via Gcc wrote: > From the discussion, it seems that there is concern about some of the > the technical directions imposed on gcc by the FSF. If we want to > resolve the current crisis without causing a fatal split within the > gcc community, we need a way at least to address those. > > Therefore, a proposal for a procedure for setting guidelines which > may also deviate from the ones > > If such a deviation is deemed necessary by somebody, it is handed > to the steering comittee, which puts it to the gcc mailing list > as an officlal RFC. Going through the steering committee is a > step for weeding out suggestions which are obviously frivolous > or trivial. > > If, after discussion and possible modification, there is unanimous > or near-unanimous consent, the RFC is approved or rejected. If > there is significant division, it is put to a vote. Everybody who > is listed in the MAINTAINERS file gets a vote, and the majority > vote is binding if there is a majority of at least n votes (with > n to be discussed). > > The steering committee then documents the new guideline. > > The whole thing should be restricted to technical matters, and > I would envision this only happening rarely, like once or twice > a year. > > Why this rather bureaucratic procedure? Because it gives a clear > and documented mandate for a change, if it is supported by the > majority of the developers. If anybody (like the FSF) takes > exception to the change, it would be something to go up against. > > Comments?
This seems like a very sensible proposal. >>= %frosku = { os => 'gnu+linux', editor => 'emacs', coffee => 1 } =<<