gdb/750: [maint] sim and common

[ac131313 at redhat dot com]

>Number:         750
>Category:       gdb
>Synopsis:       [maint] sim and common
>Confidential:   no
>Severity:       serious
>Priority:       medium
>Responsible:    unassigned
>State:          open
>Class:          change-request
>Submitter-Id:   net
>Arrival-Date:   Fri Sep 27 14:38:01 PDT 2002
>Closed-Date:
>Last-Modified:
>Originator:     ac131313@redhat.com
>Release:        unknown-1.0
>Organization:
>Environment:

>Description:
See discussion:
http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb/2002-03/msg00014.html

Hello,

The sim/MAINTAINERS file contains:

                SIM Maintainers

The simulator is part of the GDB project, so see the file
gdb/MAINTAINERS for general information about maintaining these files.

If you are considering contributing a patch, please see the file
gdb/CONTRIBUTE.  Patches to these files should be posted to:
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com                 Maintainers for particular sims:

arm             Nick Clifton <nickc@redhat.com>
ppc             Andrew Cagney <ac131313@redhat.com>
ppc             Geoff Keating <geoffk@redhat.com>
mips            Andrew Cagney <ac131313@redhat.com>
mips            Chris Demetriou <cgd@broadcom.com>
common          Ben Elliston <bje@redhat.com>
common          Frank Ch. Eigler <fche@redhat.com>


(NickC worded this very well)

I'm wondering if it would be helpful for sim specific maintainers (at least for sim/common based sims) to have implicit approval/write permission on the sim/common directory.

Which reminds me, Stephane Carrez should really be listed as the m68hc11 maintainer.  Unless, that is, GDB is going to assume that a GDB target maintainer implicitly maintains the corresponding SIM.

Thoughts?

Andrew 
>How-To-Repeat:

>Fix:

>Release-Note:
>Audit-Trail:
>Unformatted: