Toolchain Infrastructure project statement of support

[Jeff Law]

On 10/23/22 11:09, Frank Ch. Eigler via Libc-alpha wrote:
> Hi -
>
>> [...]  To be specific, gcc steering committee and glibc FSF stewards
>> have announced the decision for their projects [...]
> I may be missing something.  All I've seen so far were some of the
> leaders of some of the projects being joint signatories to a letter on
> overseers@.  As far as I'm aware, that is not how any of these
> projects make or announce **project decisions** with/to their
> respective constituencies.

Right.  It's a general statement of support from a variety of leaders 
but I wouldn't consider it authoritative from any project.


For GCC the decision would be made by the overseers and relayed to the 
overseers as an official statement for the GCC project. That would 
happen after a vote by the steering committee members based on already 
established voting procedures.


>
>
>> I am not aware of any opposition from maintainers of libabigail or
>> cygwin or any other active sourceware based project over moving
>> either, but I haven't had any links to those projects, so I may be
>> uninformed.
> Indeed.  The onus is obviously on the shoulders of the proponents of
> this proposal to convince each sourceware guest project to consent to
> move.  If you wish to frame any dissent as "blocking full migration",
> then I'd say the job of convincing everyone just has not been up to
> par.  Perhaps it was the wrong goal all along.

Also agreed.  And I fully support needing a statement from project 
leadership for each project wishing to move.    That is reasonable and I 
wish we'd been clearer about that.

In simplest terms, overseers need  to be a neutral party here.

In cases where overseers have leadership roles on particular projects, 
then they will have to wear multiple hats, but it's not really 
complicated.  Each project makes a decision, by whatever means project 
leadership has in place to make decisions. overseers then honors those 
requests to stay or go.  It's a pretty simple separation of 
responsibilities.  It need not be contentious in any way shape or form.


Jeff