From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 795 invoked by alias); 1 Feb 2003 01:43:27 -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 787 invoked from network); 1 Feb 2003 01:43:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nikam.ms.mff.cuni.cz) (195.113.18.106) by 172.16.49.205 with SMTP; 1 Feb 2003 01:43:27 -0000 Received: from camelot.ms.mff.cuni.cz (kampanus.ms.mff.cuni.cz [195.113.18.107]) by nikam.ms.mff.cuni.cz (Postfix) with SMTP id 08E184DE31; Sat, 1 Feb 2003 02:43:29 +0100 (CET) Received: by camelot.ms.mff.cuni.cz (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Sat, 1 Feb 2003 02:43:31 +0100 Date: Sat, 01 Feb 2003 01:43:00 -0000 From: Jan Hubicka To: Mark Mitchell Cc: Benjamin Kosnik , Matt Austern , "jsm28@cam.ac.uk" , "gcc@gcc.gnu.org" Subject: Re: GCC 3.3, GCC 3.4 Message-ID: <20030201014331.GB7214@kam.mff.cuni.cz> References: <20030131165429.32d4d907.bkoz@redhat.com> <57100000.1044062940@warlock.codesourcery.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <57100000.1044062940@warlock.codesourcery.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i X-SW-Source: 2003-02/txt/msg00005.txt.bz2 > > > --On Friday, January 31, 2003 04:54:29 PM -0600 Benjamin Kosnik > wrote: > > > > >Agreed. Seems to be a common concern. > > > >Mark, I think keeping at least a month in between the two events is > >advisable. > > That actually is our normal plan. > > But it's a bit hard to have it both ways -- if we can't commit to a > 3.3 date (as you suggested yesterday that we should not) then we can't > really schedule the 3.4 cutoff. > > But, we have been in 3.4 stage one for quite some time now, and Geoff > and I both managed to get our work ready at that time. Stage 1 isn't > really for *developing* new major changes, it's for *integrating* them. We would like to integrate the rtlopt branch as well. The changes are already developed for quite some time, so I believe they are ready for being added into mainline now. Hope it will fir the schedule. Honza > > We could just close the mainline during a release, but it's very clear > that nobody wants to do that -- we want to make sure development can > happen while a release is being prepared. That inherently means that > there's going to be some division of people's time between the two > branches. > > -- > Mark Mitchell mark@codesourcery.com > CodeSourcery, LLC http://www.codesourcery.com