public inbox for gcc@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Richard Guenther" <richard.guenther@gmail.com>
To: "Andrew MacLeod" <amacleod@redhat.com>
Cc: "Jason Merrill" <jason@redhat.com>,
	"Benjamin Kosnik" <bkoz@redhat.com>,
	 	gcc@gcc.gnu.org, mark@codesourcery.com
Subject: Re: GCC 4.3 release schedule
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2007 18:29:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <84fc9c000710291114p67a080a7waa80c3ae56e6a115@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4726203F.5070700@redhat.com>

On 10/29/07, Andrew MacLeod <amacleod@redhat.com> wrote:
> Jason Merrill wrote:
> > Andrew MacLeod wrote:
> >> But yes, Id still be in favour of trying this or anything else which
> >> might help. Cut a release branch, and simply refuse to open stage 1
> >> until we release.
> >
> > I think I prefer Richard's suggestion of not branching until we're
> > ready to make the .0 release.  The effect should be the same except
> > that people don't have to deal with checking patches in on the branch
> > vs. the trunk until after 4.3.0 goes out.
>
> Sure, I think it boils down to the same thing from a conceptual point of
> view, but perhaps the nitty gritty details are easier if you keep it as
> mainline so we dont have to check everything into 2 branches.  Bottom
> line is you freeze development until its time to release.

Well... this is the point of having stage3 ;)  Of course work goes on on
branches.  One point of essentially freezing mainline until the release
is to not pessimize people fixing bugs for the release instead of doing
work on the already-open-after-branching stage1.  This theoretically
would allow shortening stage1 drastically (to lets say 2 weeks of
branch merging and another 4 weeks of general "patches") to get back
to a 6 month release cycle (I personally think the each-stage-is-2-month
is not realistic).

Richard.

  reply	other threads:[~2007-10-29 18:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 53+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-10-29 15:24 Benjamin Kosnik
2007-10-29 15:54 ` Andrew MacLeod
2007-10-29 16:07   ` Benjamin Kosnik
2007-10-29 16:20     ` Richard Guenther
2007-10-29 18:04   ` Jason Merrill
2007-10-29 18:14     ` Andrew MacLeod
2007-10-29 18:29       ` Richard Guenther [this message]
2007-10-29 18:57         ` Andrew MacLeod
2007-10-29 19:37           ` Richard Guenther
2007-10-29 21:20           ` Eric Weddington
2007-10-29 22:18     ` Benjamin Kosnik
2007-10-29 22:43       ` Richard Guenther
2007-10-30  6:34         ` Mark Mitchell
2007-10-30 14:50       ` Jason Merrill
2007-10-30 15:18         ` Mark Mitchell
2007-11-01 15:45     ` Gerald Pfeifer
2007-11-01 16:01       ` Andrew MacLeod
2007-11-01 16:31         ` Benjamin Kosnik
2007-11-01 18:25           ` Richard Guenther
2007-11-01 21:39       ` Diego Novillo
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2007-10-29 23:10 J.C. Pizarro
2007-10-26 13:21 Andrew MacLeod
2007-10-26 14:05 ` Richard Guenther
2007-10-26 14:40   ` Andrew MacLeod
2007-10-26 15:54     ` Richard Guenther
2007-10-26 16:04       ` Dennis Clarke
2007-10-26 16:11         ` Richard Guenther
2007-10-26 16:32           ` Dennis Clarke
2007-10-26 18:06         ` Eric Botcazou
2007-10-26 18:14           ` Dennis Clarke
2007-10-26 18:20             ` Eric Botcazou
2007-10-26 18:41               ` Dennis Clarke
2007-10-26 21:02           ` Janis Johnson
2007-10-26 21:10             ` Eric Botcazou
2007-10-26 18:28       ` Martin Michlmayr
2007-10-26 19:03         ` Joe Buck
2007-10-26 20:49           ` Martin Michlmayr
2007-10-26 22:06             ` Joe Buck
2007-10-27  7:45               ` Martin Michlmayr
2007-10-31 19:10       ` Matthias Klose
2007-10-26 16:08     ` Mark Mitchell
2007-10-26 16:21       ` Richard Guenther
2007-10-26 16:21       ` David Daney
2007-10-26 16:45         ` Dennis Clarke
2007-10-28 16:34           ` Jason Merrill
2007-10-26 21:07       ` Andrew MacLeod
2007-11-01 16:50 ` Andrew Pinski
2007-11-01 17:38   ` Andrew MacLeod
2007-11-01 17:55   ` Jack Lloyd
2007-11-01 18:00     ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2007-11-01 18:27       ` Richard Guenther
2007-11-01 20:55         ` Gerald Pfeifer
2007-11-01 18:37     ` Andrew MacLeod

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=84fc9c000710291114p67a080a7waa80c3ae56e6a115@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=richard.guenther@gmail.com \
    --cc=amacleod@redhat.com \
    --cc=bkoz@redhat.com \
    --cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=jason@redhat.com \
    --cc=mark@codesourcery.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).