On Sun, 20 Sep 2009, Steven Bosscher wrote: > On Sat, Sep 19, 2009 at 10:57 PM, Richard Guenther wrote: > > Since the last status report we have merged the VTA branch and pieces > > of the LTO branch.  The named address-spaces changes are still pending > > review but I expect it to be merged before the end of Stage 1. > > The rest of the LTO branch will be merged last, which practically > > means after Stage 1 is over.  Thus, starting Oct 1st the trunk will > > be frozen for the LTO merge and I'll announce Stage 3 once the merge > > is completed. > > Is there a set of release criteria for all these major new features? > For example: > > * testsuite for C/C++/Fortran should pass with LTO > * idem with WHOPR? Worthwhile goals. It mostly does. > * GDB test suite should pass with -O1 Which GDB version? > * SPEC should pass with graphite > > * ... There will be bugs in new features, but not merging them will not make you know them. The premise is of course that a new feature is usable within documented constraints. > Also, IMHO a new requirement should be added for merging big new > features: Update changes.html. Yes. Well, updating changes.html before the release. Note that changes.html is for user visible changes - that may or may not apply for VTA (we don't document every new command-line flag in changes.html). > As usual for the last, say, 4 > releases, most of the interesting new features are not yet described > in the changes.html for the upcoming release (see > http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.5/changes.html). Bugs for omissions are certainly welcome, likewise patches to fix them. Thanks, Richard.