From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24757 invoked by alias); 20 Jan 2004 02:08:18 -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 24660 invoked from network); 20 Jan 2004 02:08:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (65.74.133.9) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 20 Jan 2004 02:08:17 -0000 Received: (qmail 4093 invoked from network); 20 Jan 2004 02:08:06 -0000 Received: from onepoint.windriver.com (HELO codesourcery.com) (mitchell@192.124.127.228) by mail.codesourcery.com with SMTP; 20 Jan 2004 02:08:06 -0000 Message-ID: <400C8D81.7070300@codesourcery.com> Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2004 02:08:00 -0000 From: Mark Mitchell User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040113 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Gabriel Dos Reis CC: "Kaveh R. Ghazi" , Joe.Buck@synopsys.COM, dnovillo@redhat.com, gcc@gcc.gnu.org, law@redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFC] Contributing tree-ssa to mainline References: <1074298740.3147.79.camel@frodo.toronto.redhat.com> <1074366070.3537.36.camel@minax.codesourcery.com> <200401200139.i0K1dsUu019678@caip.rutgers.edu> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004-01/txt/msg01425.txt.bz2 > The impression I've gotten from the thread that led to the sudden > gcc-3.4.x branching was that some major vendors are going to skip > GCC-3.4.x entirely, and they don't see any benefits in delaying > branching. It's a highly peripheral point to the main discussion, but, for the record, the creation of GCC 3.4 branch creation had nothing to do with any vendor input. I had announced some time ago that the GCC 3.4 branch would be made when the number of regression fell below 100, and it did, so I made the branch. -- Mark