From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11844 invoked by alias); 5 May 2002 18:37:30 -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 11837 invoked from network); 5 May 2002 18:37:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO gandalf.codesourcery.com) (66.60.148.227) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 5 May 2002 18:37:29 -0000 Received: from gandalf.codesourcery.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by gandalf.codesourcery.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g45IY8L09181 for ; Sun, 5 May 2002 11:34:13 -0700 Date: Sun, 05 May 2002 11:37:00 -0000 From: Mark Mitchell To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: GCC 3.1 Release Message-ID: <25320000.1020623648@gandalf.codesourcery.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-SW-Source: 2002-05/txt/msg00341.txt.bz2 We are nearing the end of the GCC 3.1 release cycle. There are just a couple of high-priority PRs outstanding. We will fix them, and then ship the release. Therefore, as of now, I will be accepting *no* patches that do not fix regressions. If you want me to approve a patch for GCC 3.1, please tell me that you know that it fixes an actual regression. Otherwise, I will not accept the patch, even if it is trivial, obvious, safe, and you have a note from your mother. :-) I apologize for the delays in the release. We've needed them in order to get the quality up, but that reflects that we let the mainline get too shoddy. It also means that we started doing serious testing too late. Let's do better in GCC 3.2. Thanks, -- Mark Mitchell mark@codesourcery.com CodeSourcery, LLC http://www.codesourcery.com