[PATCH, wwwdocs] document changes appropriate for bug-fix releases

[PATCH, wwwdocs] document changes appropriate for bug-fix releases

[Martin Sebor]

The patch below documents the rule of thumb for what changes are
appropriate for bug-fix release branches that we discussed in
the gcc-patches thread Re: relax rule for flexible array members
in 6.x (78039 - fails to compile glibc tests)
   https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-10/msg01818.html

Please let me know if it accurately reflects the convention in
place of if you have suggestions for changes.

Thanks
Martin

Index: htdocs/develop.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/develop.html,v
retrieving revision 1.168
diff -u -r1.168 develop.html
--- htdocs/develop.html	22 Aug 2016 07:57:26 -0000	1.168
+++ htdocs/develop.html	5 Nov 2016 22:04:30 -0000
@@ -237,6 +237,15 @@
  able to accumulate fixes for the most important problems, and avoid
  spending undue amounts of time on release testing and packaging.</p>

+<h4>Changes Appropriate for Bug-Fix Releases</h4>
+
+<p>As a general rule of thumb, bug-fix releases should contain fixes
+for regressions or serious bugs uncovered in the corresponding major
+release of GCC or those prior to it.  When backporting patches from
+subsequent releases or from trunk, care should be taken to avoid
+making changes that cause previously accepted code to be rejected
+unless doing so would cause GCC to generate incorrect object code
+or code with undefined behavior.</p>

  <h3><a name="num_scheme">Version Numbering Scheme for GCC 5 and 
Up</a></h3>

Re: [PATCH, wwwdocs] document changes appropriate for bug-fix releases

[Jeff Law]

On 11/05/2016 04:04 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
> The patch below documents the rule of thumb for what changes are
> appropriate for bug-fix release branches that we discussed in
> the gcc-patches thread Re: relax rule for flexible array members
> in 6.x (78039 - fails to compile glibc tests)
>   https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-10/msg01818.html
>
> Please let me know if it accurately reflects the convention in
> place of if you have suggestions for changes.
This is fine.  Please install if you haven't already

jeff