This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH] manual: Remove warning in the documentation of the abort function
- From: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Florian Weimer <fweimer at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Richard Stallman <rms at gnu dot org>, Paul Eggert <eggert at cs dot ucla dot edu>, <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>, <oliva at gnu dot org>, <rain1 at airmail dot cc>
- Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2019 21:40:06 +0000
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] manual: Remove warning in the documentation of the abort function
- Ironport-sdr: pJqlBeBrilUiBxAsVCfrRo3MKqUFio2U4+UANBPmYRrmyOnYYVWKuDn3epZvByO+uUQuOU2hOH HSIXax+sq5DwbEuRyPQuulp4+HrPYs+fm3VZnLzVZGLfcYJ2zufzxYy/c5KFEMR4qW2nRunFK/ 5gVmvRN8U3DHJ6eocC7b+oEkLJYHdD9DGBhajx9FO6QmrqTVcCar21KCIOB7HWlU7JXMsxxdLl omhiePppXYSurWKEmVxKAJCrRv4ggrq12AGP+7ZTHO5CJ3K2yYBPFMq/4zp1o7HJe9vgjwTJtk rK0=
- Ironport-sdr: u7Kh8jq+9Vo3QVJLzzJfjitA6LbS9p/v7JojtdzcMV3wHquzHY8OjS+RR0KLDvxtL6Mihw+aK9 iGLg3x+U5FpN2DwFUzyvhIB6qP1sO0avgPPoMory6Wx68Qg1dwliKQ1YQQcRLND5w81gA6PbbI GRiphHXrE8lDwbE0tK1V711KUKdB7ddPU07v3hGxsrqgiukEkkcdokICorG33bGbHGlLCxKeYZ ud3adx+svd5P54KokBvKuJjij+YPod2OUB5zUu0QoFRXriE01u+DXKhP04eb9ljKQyUveOXWdW 704=
- References: <87a7ach367.fsf@oldenburg2.str.redhat.com> <a69483fd-91cd-884d-2059-e706c378152c@cs.ucla.edu> <E1iHwJq-0008Gc-Qz@fencepost.gnu.org> <87o8yr7x4u.fsf@oldenburg2.str.redhat.com>
On Tue, 8 Oct 2019, Florian Weimer wrote:
> You said repeatedly that you are still in charge in the GNU project, and
> that GNU is not a democracy. So this should really be simple. Just say
> you want the warning gone, and it will be gone. Or you tell us you want
> to keep it.
And if Richard wants it kept, I consider that just a previous maintainer's
view to be considered by the maintainers. This is not a difficult
question about the exact boundaries of when it is appropriate for GNU to
intervene in decisions made by individual package maintainers; it's a case
for which it's extremely clear-cut that it's properly within the scope of
package maintainers to make the final decision and would be improper for
GNU to attempt to overrule such a decision. The precise boundaries of
appropriate intervention in individual packages may be worth considering
elsewhere, but that's not relevant for this case.
--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com