From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12276 invoked by alias); 13 Apr 2002 12:25:07 -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 12261 invoked from network); 13 Apr 2002 12:25:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO laptop.moene.indiv.nluug.nl) (195.109.255.217) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 13 Apr 2002 12:25:05 -0000 Received: from local ([127.0.0.1] helo=moene.indiv.nluug.nl) by laptop.moene.indiv.nluug.nl with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 16wMah-0000Eb-00; Sat, 13 Apr 2002 14:25:15 +0200 Message-ID: <3CB823A0.136EF4E3@moene.indiv.nluug.nl> Date: Sat, 13 Apr 2002 07:50:00 -0000 From: Toon Moene Organization: Moene Computational Physics, Maartensdijk, The Netherlands X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Neil Booth CC: Mark Mitchell , gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: GCC 3.1 Release References: <46690000.1018660657@gandalf.codesourcery.com> <20020413091819.GA16217@daikokuya.demon.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2002-04/txt/msg00530.txt.bz2 Neil Booth wrote: > Mark Mitchell wrote:- > > I have a proposal before the SC to slip the GCC 3.2 schedule even > > further; so that the first phase of GCC 3.2 development will now end > > one month beyond the release of GCC 3.1 -- June 1st -- pushing the > > GCC 3.2 release date back to October 1st so as to give people time to > > work on major changes for GCC 3.2 *after* GCC 3.1 is released. > > IMO this is still too short; I think there should be two months after > the previous release for the first phase, giving us an 8-month cycle > instead of a 6-month one. The problem with Mark's "mental model" of the release process is that bug fixing doesn't screech to a grinding halt the moment 3.1 is out. Because then a whole group of "new" testers comes along and finds new bugs that we (and our "regular" testers) haven't found. For 3.0 this effect was so bad that basically only the 3.0.4 release can be described as "generally useful". I do not have a good solution to that problem. -- Toon Moene - mailto:toon@moene.indiv.nluug.nl - phoneto: +31 346 214290 Saturnushof 14, 3738 XG Maartensdijk, The Netherlands Maintainer, GNU Fortran 77: http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/g77_news.html Join GNU Fortran 95: http://g95.sourceforge.net/ (under construction)