public inbox for gcc@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Zack Weinberg <zack@codesourcery.com>
To: Nathanael Nerode <neroden@twcny.rr.com>
Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: Target deprecation, round four
Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2003 19:46:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87znobylft.fsf@egil.codesourcery.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20030304164917.GA358@doctormoo> (Nathanael Nerode's message of "Tue, 4 Mar 2003 11:49:17 -0500")

Nathanael Nerode <neroden@twcny.rr.com> writes:

>Richard Earnshaw said:
>>Surely a release containing the deprecation announcement should be
>>made *before* we start removing the code...  As it stands you are
>>proposing to delete the code from the mainline before most of the
>>world is even aware of this.
>
> I deprecated vax-vms for 3.3 and promptly deleted it from mainline.
> But this is because vax-vms (a) wasn't working, (b) hadn't been for
> a long time, and (c) had over 10,000 lines of code devoted to it.  I
> would agree that deletions of *working* targets be delayed until the
> version with the deprecation has been released.  But deletions of
> *non-working* targets, I think, can take place as soon as possible.

The trouble with this otherwise reasonable suggestion is, (a) I have
no way to tell whether the majority of the targets on the list are
still working; (b) we have no schedule for the 3.3 release.  Also, I
am holding off on several performance patches that will involve
touching lots of back-end code, because I don't want to waste time on
targets that will be deleted in short order.  And it's not hard to
pull a deleted target back from CVS if someone does turn up expressing
interest.

But a wider announcement should happen.  How about I send the list to
gcc-announce now, and wait another week before making any actual
changes?

zw

  reply	other threads:[~2003-03-04 19:35 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2003-03-04 16:57 Nathanael Nerode
2003-03-04 19:46 ` Zack Weinberg [this message]
2003-03-04 19:48   ` Mark Ferrell
2003-03-04 19:56   ` Richard Earnshaw
2003-03-05 10:24   ` Nathan Sidwell
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-03-04  5:43 Zack Weinberg
2003-03-04  5:43 ` Christopher Faylor
2003-03-04  6:06   ` Zack Weinberg
2003-03-04 10:33 ` Richard Earnshaw

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=87znobylft.fsf@egil.codesourcery.com \
    --to=zack@codesourcery.com \
    --cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=neroden@twcny.rr.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).