From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-156666-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 24295 invoked by alias); 20 Sep 2009 11:38:25 -0000
Received: (qmail 24287 invoked by uid 22791); 20 Sep 2009 11:38:24 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mail-ew0-f226.google.com (HELO mail-ew0-f226.google.com) (209.85.219.226)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sun, 20 Sep 2009 11:38:21 +0000
Received: by ewy26 with SMTP id 26so2324937ewy.29         for <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>; Sun, 20 Sep 2009 04:38:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.211.160.19 with SMTP id m19mr1836282ebo.2.1253446698825;         Sun, 20 Sep 2009 04:38:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?192.168.2.99? (cpc2-cmbg8-0-0-cust61.cmbg.cable.ntl.com [82.6.108.62])         by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 10sm9557327eyd.40.2009.09.20.04.38.18         (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5);         Sun, 20 Sep 2009 04:38:18 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4AB61783.8070302@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2009 11:38:00 -0000
From: Dave Korn <dave.korn.cygwin@googlemail.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (Windows/20080914)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Richard Guenther <rguenther@suse.de>
CC: Dave Korn <dave.korn.cygwin@googlemail.com>, gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: GCC 4.5 Status Report (2009-09-19)
References: <alpine.LNX.2.00.0909192244530.4520@zhemvz.fhfr.qr> <4AB58A42.7030801@gmail.com> <alpine.LNX.2.00.0909201047060.4520@zhemvz.fhfr.qr>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LNX.2.00.0909201047060.4520@zhemvz.fhfr.qr>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/>
Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org
X-SW-Source: 2009-09/txt/msg00375.txt.bz2

Richard Guenther wrote:

> Note that Stage 3 isn't that strict as it may sound.  Maintainers have
> quite amount of flexibility deciding what is considered a bug and thus
> a bugfix during Stage 3 (note that Stage3 is _not_ only for regression
> fixes).  This includes obviously Graphite and LTO as well as target
> specific changes.
> 
> What you won't see in Stage 3 is rewrites of infrastructure or adding of
> new optimization passes.

  Thanks Richard, that's pretty reassuring.

  BTW, why don't we call this more-flexible-stage-3 "stage 2" any more?  It
sounds a lot like the way that's still described on develop.html.

    cheers,
      DaveK