CTI - Making a decision for glibc.

[Andrew Pinski]

On Wed, Jan 28, 2026 at 2:13 PM Siddhesh Poyarekar <siddhesh@gotplt.org> wrote:
>
> On 2026-01-28 16:45, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> > 1. It's my impression that there are a small number of people (Carlos
> >     O'Donell, David Edelsohn, Joseph Myers, and possibly *no one else*)
> >     who feel strongly that glibc should move off of sourceware.org, and
> >     *everyone else* with a stake in the matter is somewhere on a spectrum
> >     between neutral and a strong belief that glibc *shouldn't* move, or
> >     at least, should not move to infrastructure hosted by the Linux
> >     Foundation.
>
> If you're naming names it's Carlos O'Donell, David Edelsohn, Joseph
> Myers, Siddhesh Poyarekar, Florian Weimer, Maxim Kuvyrkov, Jeff Law and
> Andreas Huettel who have vocally supported the move in this thread,
> while many others (who I hope will chime in too) who contribute on a day
> to day basis, have expressed support offline in the past.  Your base
> characterization of the situation is flawed I'm afraid.

Let me speak up on why sometimes the characterization of the
situtation gets flawed here.
The issue is hosting on sourceware vs LF IT doing the hosting is being
conflated with the security side of things.
And the only side that is doing that conflated is the side that has
been very vocal on moving to LT IT.

So let's step back both sides on this and talk about one thing and
only one thing. That is the hosting of glibc project.
Security issues do have dependency on which side is chosen to some
extent. BUT from the contract of CTI and LF IT before it was still
most of the heavy lifting was going to be the community rather than
the LF IT.
Which brings up another point why LF IT why not LLVM foundation IT (if
it exists any more)? Or say Rust foundation or Mozilla foundation IT?
It was seemed like there was only one choice and ever once one choice.
Why not use FSF IT instead?

Also I am still wondering about this statement what changed after it:
As of 2025-08-11 moving to new infrastructure is on hold as we discuss
the core reasons for the migration.

yes I saw this:
As of 2025-08-19 an evaluation of glibc moving from git to gitolite is
in progress.
But that can be done with any hosting including sourceware.
So the bigger question what forced this statement.
Which also gives way to this from
https://lore.kernel.org/cti-tac/3b1aaa90-9b46-4ce3-9209-4b9c358107d9@redhat.com/:
  * Carlos to post to the glibc mailing list to raise infrastructure move again.

>From https://lore.kernel.org/cti-tac/4c7f3274-1c2d-4ae6-935a-5ceb656d71c4@redhat.com/
  * Disucssed 5 whys and why we're still on existing infrastructure
versus a transition.

So what is the 5 whys?

Thanks,
Andrew






>
> Sid