binutils-gdb/binutils/MAINTAINERS

		========= Binutils Maintainers =========

This is the list of individuals responsible for maintenance and update
of the GNU Binary Utilities project.  This includes the linker (ld),
the assembler (gas), the profiler (gprof), a whole suite of other
programs (binutils) and the libraries that they use (bfd and
opcodes).  This project shares a common set of header files with the
GCC and GDB projects (include), so maintainership of those files is 
shared amoungst the projects.

The home page for binutils is:

  http://www.gnu.org/software/binutils/binutils.html

and patches should be sent to:

  bug-binutils@gnu.org    or    binutils@sources.redhat.com
  
with "[Patch]" as part of the subject line.  Note - patches to the
top level config.guess and config.sub scripts should be sent to:

  config-patches@gnu.org

and not to the binutils lists.  Patches to the other top level
configure files (configure, configure.in, config-ml.in) should
be sent to the binutils lists, and copied to the gcc and gdb
lists as well (gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org and
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com).

		--------- Blanket Write Privs ---------

The following people have permission to check patches into the
repository without obtaining approval first:
		
  Nick Clifton <nickc@redhat.com> (head maintainer)
  Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com>
  Ian Lance Taylor <ian@airs.com>
  Jeff Law <law@redhat.com>
  Jim Wilson <wilson@specifixinc.com>
  DJ Delorie <dj@redhat.com>
  Alan Modra <amodra@bigpond.net.au>
  Michael Meissner <gnu@the-meissners.org>
  Daniel Jacobowitz <dan@debian.org>

      --------- Maintainers ---------

Maintainers are individuals who are responsible for, and have
permission to check in changes in, certain subsets of the code.  Note
that maintainers still need approval to check in changes outside of
the immediate domain that they maintain.

If there is no maintainer for a given domain then the responsibility
falls to the head maintainer (above).  If there are several
maintainers for a given domain then responsibility falls to the first
maintainer.  The first maintainer is free to devolve that
responsibility among the other maintainers.

  ALPHA            Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com>
  ARM		   Nick Clifton <nickc@redhat.com>
  ARM		   Richard Earnshaw <rearnsha@arm.com>
  ARM (Symbian)	   Paul Brook <paul@codesourcery.com>
  ARM (Symbian)	   Mark Mitchell <mark@codesourcery.com>
  AVR		   Denis Chertykov <denisc@overta.ru>
  AVR		   Marek Michalkiewicz <marekm@amelek.gda.pl>
  BUILD SYSTEM	   Ben Elliston <bje@gnu.org>
  BUILD SYSTEM	   Daniel Jacobowitz <dan@debian.org>
  CRIS		   Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp@axis.com>
  CRX		   Tomer Levi <Tomer.Levi@nsc.com>
  DWARF2	   Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com>
  FR30		   Dave Brolley <brolley@redhat.com>
  FRV		   Dave Brolley <brolley@redhat.com>
  FRV		   Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@redhat.com>
  HPPA		   Dave Anglin <dave.anglin@nrc.ca>
  HPPA elf32	   Alan Modra <amodra@bigpond.net.au>
  HPPA elf64	   Jeff Law <law@redhat.com> [Basic maintainance only]
  IA-64		   Jim Wilson <wilson@specifixinc.com>
  IQ2000	   Stan Cox <scox@redhat.com>
  i860		   Jason Eckhardt <jle@rice.edu>
  ix86		   Alan Modra <amodra@bigpond.net.au>
  ix86 PE	   Christopher Faylor <cgf@redhat.com>
  ix86 COFF	   DJ Delorie <dj@redhat.com>
  ix86		   H.J.Lu <hjl@gnu.org>
  M68HC11 M68HC12  Stephane Carrez <stcarrez@nerim.fr>
  M68k		   Ben Elliston <bje@gnu.org>
  M88k		   Mark Kettenis <kettenis@gnu.org>
  MAXQ		   Inderpreet Singh <inderpreetb@noida.hcltech.com>
  MIPS		   Eric Christopher <echristo@redhat.com>
  MIPS		   Thiemo Seufer <ths@networkno.de>
  MMIX		   Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp@bitrange.com>
  MN10300	   Eric Christopher <echristo@redhat.com>
  MN10300	   Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@redhat.com>
  MSP430	   Dmitry Diky <diwil@spec.ru>
  PPC		   Geoff Keating <geoffk@geoffk.org>
  PPC vector ext   Aldy Hernandez <aldyh@redhat.com>
  s390, s390x	   Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>
  SH		   J<>rn Rennecke <joern.rennecke@superh.com>
  SH		   Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@redhat.com>
  SH		   Kaz Kojima <kkojima@rr.iij4u.or.jp>
  SPARC		   Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
  TESTSUITES	   Ben Elliston <bje@gnu.org>
  TIC4X            Svein Seldal <svein@dev.seldal.com>
  TIC54X           Timothy Wall <twall@alum.mit.edu>
  VAX		   Jason R Thorpe <thorpej@netbsd.org>
  x86_64	   Jan Hubicka <jh@suse.cz>
  x86_64	   Andreas Jaeger <aj@suse.de>
  Xtensa	   Bob Wilson <bob.wilson@acm.org>
  z8k		   Christian Groessler <chris@groessler.org>


      --------- CGEN Maintainers -------------

CGEN is a tool for building, amongst other things, assemblers,
disassemblers and simulators from a single description of a CPU.
It creates files in several of the binutils directories, but it
is mentioned here since there is a single group that maintains
CGEN and the files that it creates. 

If you have CGEN related problems you can send email to;

   cgen@sources.redhat.com

The current CGEN maintainers are:

  Doug Evans, Ben Elliston, Frank Eigler

     --------- Write After Approval ---------

Individuals with "write after approval" have the ability to check in
changes, but they must get approval for each change from someone in
one of the above lists (blanket write or maintainers).

[It's a huge list, folks.  You know who you are.  If you have the
 *ability* to do binutils checkins, you're in this group.  Just
 remember to get approval before checking anything in.]

     -------------  Obvious Fixes -------------

Fixes for obvious mistakes do not need approval, and can be checked in
right away, but the patch should still be sent to the binutils list.
The definition of obvious is a bit hazy, and if you are not sure, then
you should seek approval first.  Obvious fixes include fixes for
spelling mistakes, blatantly incorrect code (where the correct code is
also blatantly obvious), and so on.  Obvious fixes should always be
small, the larger they are, the more likely it is that they contain
some un-obvious side effect or consequence.

    --------- Branch Checkins ---------

If a patch is approved for check in to the mainline sources, it can
also be checked into the current release branch.  Normally however
only bug fixes should be applied to the branch.  New features, new
ports, etc, should be restricted to the mainline.  (Otherwise the
burden of maintaining the branch in sync with the mainline becomes too 
great).  If you are uncertain as to whether a patch is appropriate for
the branch, ask the branch maintainer.  This is:

   Daniel Jacobowitz  <dan@debian.org>

    -------- Testsuites ---------------

In general patches to any of the binutils testsuites should be
considered generic and sent to the binutils mailing list for
approval.  Patches to target specific tests are the responsibility the
relevent port maintainer(s), and can be approved/checked in by them.
Other testsuite patches need the approval of a blanket-write-priveleges
person.

    -------- Configure patches ----------

Patches to the top level configure files (config.sub & config.guess)
are not the domain of the binutils project and they cannot be approved
by the binutils group.  Instead they should be submitted to the config
maintainer at:

	config-patches@gnu.org

    --------- Creating Branches ---------

Anyone with at least write-after-approval access may create a branch
to use for their own development purposes.  In keeping with FSF
policies, all patches applied to such a branch must come from people
with appropriate copyright assignments on file.  All legal
requirements that would apply to any other contribution apply equally
to contributions on a branch.

Before creating the branch, you should select a name for the branch of
the form:

  binutils-<org>-<name> 

where "org" is the initials of your organization, or your own initials
if you are acting as an individual.  For example, for a branch created
by The GNUDist Company, "tgc" would be an appropriate choice for
"org".  It's up to each organization to select an appropriate choice
for "name"; some organizations may use more structure than others, so
"name" may contain additional hyphens.

Suppose that The GNUDist Company was creating a branch to develop a
port of Binutils to the FullMonty processor.  Then, an appropriate
choice of branch name would be:

  binutils-tgc-fm

A data stamp is not required as part of the name field, but some
organizations like to have one.  If you do include the date, you
should follow these rules:

1. The date should be the date that the branch was created.

2. The date should be numerical and in the form YYYYMMDD.

For example:

  binutils-tgc-fm_20050101

would be appropriate if the branch was created on January 1st, 2005.

Having selected the branch name, create the branch as follows:

1. Check out binutils, so that you have a CVS checkout corresponding
   to the initial state of your branch.

2. Create a tag:

     cvs tag binutils-<org>-<name>-branchpoint

   That tag will allow you, and others, to easily determine what's
   changed on the branch relative to the initial state.

3. Create the branch:

     cvs rtag -b -r binutils-<org>-<name>-branchpoint \
       binutils-<org>-<name>-branch 

4. Document the branch:

     Add a description of the branch to binutils/BRANCHES, and check
     that file in.  All branch descriptions should be added to the
     HEAD revision of the file; it doesn't help to modify
     binutils/BRANCHES on a branch!

Please do not commit any patches to a branch you did not create
without the explicit permission of the person who created the branch.