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 } =<<
