From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27753 invoked by alias); 30 Aug 2004 10:03:50 -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 27732 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2004 10:03:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu) (128.122.140.213) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 30 Aug 2004 10:03:48 -0000 Received: by vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu (4.1/1.34) id AA23682; Mon, 30 Aug 04 06:06:39 EDT Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 10:11:00 -0000 From: kenner@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu (Richard Kenner) Message-Id: <10408301006.AA23682@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu> To: phil@codesourcery.com Subject: Re: Release numbering Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2004-08/txt/msg01465.txt.bz2 Trying to get the SC to hand down a 4.0 decision now will cause tension, fights, disagreement, plagues, etc. Why not work together to create a release that we can agree is worthy of the name 4.0? Why does it have to be forced through now? Because the difference between the next release and this one will be *far* less than between 3.4 and this one. If people didn't feel this level of changes merited "4.0", the next level certainly wouldn't.