From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16732 invoked by alias); 24 Sep 2004 02:35:24 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 16697 invoked from network); 24 Sep 2004 02:35:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO smtp3.libero.it) (193.70.192.127) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 24 Sep 2004 02:35:21 -0000 Received: from localhost (172.16.1.82) by smtp3.libero.it (7.0.027-DD01) id 40D05D0F014FFB07; Fri, 24 Sep 2004 04:35:19 +0200 Received: from bagio (151.42.78.220) by smtp20.libero.it (7.0.027-DD01) id 40E3F8E20359C2E9; Fri, 24 Sep 2004 04:35:19 +0200 Message-ID: <009001c4a1df$2a120720$dc4e2a97@bagio> From: "Giovanni Bajo" To: "Mark Mitchell" Cc: , "Gabriel Dos Reis" References: <41510EA1.2090402@codesourcery.com> <415326E9.7010407@codesourcery.com> Subject: Re: GCC Release Status (2004-09-21) Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 02:46:00 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at libero.it serv3 X-SW-Source: 2004-09/txt/msg01391.txt.bz2 Mark Mitchell wrote: >> So Stage 3 is expected to be rather shorter than normal? >> > No, I'm afraid I said October when I meant November. Then again, I > wouldn't hold up making a release branch if it really looked like we > had all our ducks in a row. Are we going to have some target for branching? Like less than 100 regressions? I think it worked pretty well for 3.4 which is now very stable. On the contrary, 3.3 was branched way too early IMO, and I know Gaby agrees here. If we are going to have a limit, it is better to know earlier than later, so people can do their planning. There are ~195 regressions right now. Giovanni Bajo