>4) He does have access to the source tree, in the same way as most
>other contributors.

What he wants is access to the CVS tree so that he can do "cvs log"
and "cvs diff"... given the significant nature of his contributions
this is totally reasonable.   

In fact, I think *everyone* should have access to "cvs log" and 
"cvs diff" info if they want it.  (maybe there should be some sort
of public access "cvs" server or something...)   Is the lack of general
CVS read-access a policy decision, or a technical problem?

>I think it's reasonably clear that only people in the `core' group
>know the details of this, and we consider much of the information to
>be confidential.

That is fine, although I'm not sure how confidential Theo considers
his side of the story.

>Please note that the description of this list is:
>   Technical discussion regarding NetBSD/sparc
>Discussion not directly related to the NetBSD/sparc port and/or not
>technically oriented is not appropriate, and should be taken elsewhere.
>In particular, if you have questions about something the `core' group
>has done, you should mail them to `core@netbsd.org'.

The discussion is important to the sparc port and has technical
implications WRT CVS access, the sun4m port, etc.   If it were moved
to the `core' mailing list then it would exclude most of the people
on this mailing list.   If I want to make a private comment to `core'
I will direct it at the `core' mailing list.   However, I am making a
public statement, and it seems like the only place to make a public 
statement about things WRT to the sparc port is right here.

Chuck