time to create the GDB 8.1.x branch?

time to create the GDB 8.1.x branch?

[Joel Brobecker]

Hello,

I think it is time to start thinking about the next release (8.1),
as it has been 5.5 months since we release 8.0, and 7 months
since we created the 8.0.x branch!

I've created the following wiki page for keeping track of this release
cycle:

    https://sourceware.org/gdb/wiki/GDB_8.1_Release

Looking at the gdb/NEWS file, it shows a fair number of enhancements.
Also, outside of one GDB PR that was marked for 8.1 but is no longer
critical IMO, we have no PR active targetting 8.1.

Are there any changes that would be worth waiting for before we branch
8.1? If not, I plan on creating the branch next Monday (Nov 27th).

Thank you,
-- 
Joel

Re: time to create the GDB 8.1.x branch?

[Ulrich Weigand]

Joel Brobecker wrote:

> Are there any changes that would be worth waiting for before we branch
> 8.1? If not, I plan on creating the branch next Monday (Nov 27th).

I'd like to get in the last two patches to actually enable MPFR
support for target floating-point emulation.

Given that all outstanding comments have now been addressed, I think
I should be able to just commit those this week (unless there are
any objections), so this would still be fine with your proposed
schedule.

Bye,
Ulrich

-- 
  Dr. Ulrich Weigand
  GNU/Linux compilers and toolchain
  Ulrich.Weigand@de.ibm.com

Re: time to create the GDB 8.1.x branch?

[Joel Brobecker]

Hi Ulrich,

> > Are there any changes that would be worth waiting for before we branch
> > 8.1? If not, I plan on creating the branch next Monday (Nov 27th).
> 
> I'd like to get in the last two patches to actually enable MPFR
> support for target floating-point emulation.
> 
> Given that all outstanding comments have now been addressed, I think
> I should be able to just commit those this week (unless there are
> any objections), so this would still be fine with your proposed
> schedule.

IIUC, you've now pushed those patches, right?
Ref: https://www.sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2017-11/msg00489.html

If not, let me know!

-- 
Joel

Re: time to create the GDB 8.1.x branch?

[Ulrich Weigand]

Joel Brobecker wrote:
> > I'd like to get in the last two patches to actually enable MPFR
> > support for target floating-point emulation.
> > 
> > Given that all outstanding comments have now been addressed, I think
> > I should be able to just commit those this week (unless there are
> > any objections), so this would still be fine with your proposed
> > schedule.
> 
> IIUC, you've now pushed those patches, right?
> Ref: https://www.sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2017-11/msg00489.html

Yes, those are all in now.

As an unrelated matter, I just noticed this major regresion on powerpc64:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2017-11/msg00666.html

This is IMO another issue that really ought to be fixed before the
release ...

Bye,
Ulrich

-- 
  Dr. Ulrich Weigand
  GNU/Linux compilers and toolchain
  Ulrich.Weigand@de.ibm.com

Re: time to create the GDB 8.1.x branch?

[Pedro Alves]

On 11/28/2017 07:44 PM, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> Joel Brobecker wrote:
>>> I'd like to get in the last two patches to actually enable MPFR
>>> support for target floating-point emulation.
>>>
>>> Given that all outstanding comments have now been addressed, I think
>>> I should be able to just commit those this week (unless there are
>>> any objections), so this would still be fine with your proposed
>>> schedule.
>>
>> IIUC, you've now pushed those patches, right?
>> Ref: https://www.sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2017-11/msg00489.html
> 
> Yes, those are all in now.
> 
> As an unrelated matter, I just noticed this major regresion on powerpc64:
> https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2017-11/msg00666.html
> 
> This is IMO another issue that really ought to be fixed before the
> release ...
> 

I agree.  Your suggestion sounded good to me.  I just haven't
yet had  time to try it out.  I wouldn't be offended if someone
beat me to it...  :-)

(I'm currently handling PR gdb/22499, another regression.)
Thanks,
Pedro Alves

Re: time to create the GDB 8.1.x branch?

[Pedro Alves]

On 11/28/2017 08:32 PM, Pedro Alves wrote:
> On 11/28/2017 07:44 PM, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
>> Joel Brobecker wrote:
>>>> I'd like to get in the last two patches to actually enable MPFR
>>>> support for target floating-point emulation.
>>>>
>>>> Given that all outstanding comments have now been addressed, I think
>>>> I should be able to just commit those this week (unless there are
>>>> any objections), so this would still be fine with your proposed
>>>> schedule.
>>>
>>> IIUC, you've now pushed those patches, right?
>>> Ref: https://www.sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2017-11/msg00489.html
>>
>> Yes, those are all in now.
>>
>> As an unrelated matter, I just noticed this major regresion on powerpc64:
>> https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2017-11/msg00666.html
>>
>> This is IMO another issue that really ought to be fixed before the
>> release ...
>>
> 
> I agree.  Your suggestion sounded good to me.  I just haven't
> yet had  time to try it out.  I wouldn't be offended if someone
> beat me to it...  :-)

I tried it now and it seems to work fine, and the test I had added
works on ppc too with that fix.  I'll some more testing and
post it after lunch.

Thanks,
Pedro Alves

Re: time to create the GDB 8.1.x branch?

[Joel Brobecker]

> > I agree.  Your suggestion sounded good to me.  I just haven't
> > yet had  time to try it out.  I wouldn't be offended if someone
> > beat me to it...  :-)
> 
> I tried it now and it seems to work fine, and the test I had added
> works on ppc too with that fix.  I'll some more testing and
> post it after lunch.

Thanks for the heads up and for delivering the fix so quickly.
As far as I can tell, it's very close to getting in, so I will
not bother adding an item in the release wiki page. I assume
it will get in before some other pending patches do. But do let me
know if it somehow gets delayed and should be tracked in the release
wiki page!

-- 
Joel

Re: time to create the GDB 8.1.x branch?

[Pedro Alves]

On 11/29/2017 09:00 PM, Joel Brobecker wrote:
>>> I agree.  Your suggestion sounded good to me.  I just haven't
>>> yet had  time to try it out.  I wouldn't be offended if someone
>>> beat me to it...  :-)
>>
>> I tried it now and it seems to work fine, and the test I had added
>> works on ppc too with that fix.  I'll some more testing and
>> post it after lunch.
> 
> Thanks for the heads up and for delivering the fix so quickly.
> As far as I can tell, it's very close to getting in, so I will
> not bother adding an item in the release wiki page. I assume
> it will get in before some other pending patches do. But do let me
> know if it somehow gets delayed and should be tracked in the release
> wiki page!

The patch is already in.  :-)

Thanks,
Pedro Alves

Re: time to create the GDB 8.1.x branch?

[Joel Brobecker]

> > Thanks for the heads up and for delivering the fix so quickly.
> > As far as I can tell, it's very close to getting in, so I will
> > not bother adding an item in the release wiki page. I assume
> > it will get in before some other pending patches do. But do let me
> > know if it somehow gets delayed and should be tracked in the release
> > wiki page!
> 
> The patch is already in.  :-)

Sometimes, I feel like I live in a time machine... ;-)

-- 
Joel

Re: time to create the GDB 8.1.x branch?

[Yao Qi]

Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com> writes:

> Are there any changes that would be worth waiting for before we branch
> 8.1? If not, I plan on creating the branch next Monday (Nov 27th).

I'd like to finish my armv8 tagged pointer support by 8.1 release, but
it shouldn't block creating 8.1 branch.

-- 
Yao (齐尧)

Re: time to create the GDB 8.1.x branch?

[Pedro Alves]

On 11/20/2017 07:15 PM, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> I think it is time to start thinking about the next release (8.1),
> as it has been 5.5 months since we release 8.0, and 7 months
> since we created the 8.0.x branch!

W00t, already! :-P

> 
> I've created the following wiki page for keeping track of this release
> cycle:
> 
>     https://sourceware.org/gdb/wiki/GDB_8.1_Release
> 
> Looking at the gdb/NEWS file, it shows a fair number of enhancements.
> Also, outside of one GDB PR that was marked for 8.1 but is no longer
> critical IMO, we have no PR active targetting 8.1.
> 
> Are there any changes that would be worth waiting for before we branch
> 8.1? If not, I plan on creating the branch next Monday (Nov 27th).

I'd like to get the rest of the C++ breakpoint improvements series in.

A good part of it is in, which already fixed many user-visible things,
but the NEWS change hasn't yet:
  https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2017-06/msg00594.html

The remaining part is the support for wild matching (ignore
leading classes/namespaces) for C++, and support for breakpoints on
symbols with ABI tags.
Keith reviewed the whole series but I haven't gotten around to
addressing his comments on that part of the series yes (since
only recently that lookup_name_info patch got in).  I'll try
to do that ASAP.

Thanks,
Pedro Alves

Re: time to create the GDB 8.1.x branch?

[Joel Brobecker]

Hi Pedro,

> The remaining part is the support for wild matching (ignore
> leading classes/namespaces) for C++, and support for breakpoints on
> symbols with ABI tags.
> Keith reviewed the whole series but I haven't gotten around to
> addressing his comments on that part of the series yes (since
> only recently that lookup_name_info patch got in).  I'll try
> to do that ASAP.

I am trying to update the release's wiki page, by listing all
the pending changes, and provide links to discussions and patches.
Is that the patch series you'd like to get in?

https://www.sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2017-11/msg00689.html

Thanks!
-- 
Joel

Re: time to create the GDB 8.1.x branch?

[Pedro Alves]

On 11/27/2017 10:20 PM, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> Hi Pedro,
> 
>> The remaining part is the support for wild matching (ignore
>> leading classes/namespaces) for C++, and support for breakpoints on
>> symbols with ABI tags.
>> Keith reviewed the whole series but I haven't gotten around to
>> addressing his comments on that part of the series yes (since
>> only recently that lookup_name_info patch got in).  I'll try
>> to do that ASAP.
> 
> I am trying to update the release's wiki page, by listing all
> the pending changes, and provide links to discussions and patches.
> Is that the patch series you'd like to get in?
> 
> https://www.sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2017-11/msg00689.html

Yes.

Thanks,
Pedro Alves

Re: time to create the GDB 8.1.x branch?

[Joel Brobecker]

> > I am trying to update the release's wiki page, by listing all
> > the pending changes, and provide links to discussions and patches.
> > Is that the patch series you'd like to get in?
> > 
> > https://www.sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2017-11/msg00689.html
> 
> Yes.

Awesome, thanks for confirming, Pedro.

-- 
Joel

Re: time to create the GDB 8.1.x branch?

[Pedro Alves]

On 11/29/2017 08:55 PM, Joel Brobecker wrote:
>>> I am trying to update the release's wiki page, by listing all
>>> the pending changes, and provide links to discussions and patches.
>>> Is that the patch series you'd like to get in?
>>>
>>> https://www.sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2017-11/msg00689.html
>>
>> Yes.
> 
> Awesome, thanks for confirming, Pedro.

The above is all merged to master now too.

I'll take a look at Keith's inline breakpoints patch next.

Thanks,
Pedro Alves

Re: time to create the GDB 8.1.x branch?

[Joel Brobecker]

> The above is all merged to master now too.

Thanks for letting me know. I updated the wiki page accordingly.

> I'll take a look at Keith's inline breakpoints patch next.

Sounds good!

-- 
Joel

Re: time to create the GDB 8.1.x branch?

[Yao Qi]

Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com> writes:

> Are there any changes that would be worth waiting for before we branch
> 8.1? If not, I plan on creating the branch next Monday (Nov 27th).

Hi Joel,
Arm still has pending patch series about new ARMv8.3-A Pointer
Authentication feature support in GDB.  They were posted in Aug, and
reviewed,

https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2017-08/msg00174.html
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2017-08/msg00175.html
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2017-08/msg00171.html
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2017-08/msg00172.html
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2017-08/msg00173.html
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2017-08/msg00176.html

The GDB support needs the new regset provided by Linux kernel, so
these GDB patches can't go in until the kernel patches are merged.
I think kernel patches will be merged in several (5?) weeks, is it OK to
get these GDB patches into 8.1 release (mainline first and backport to
8.1 branch)?  To be clear, I don't expect GDB 8.1 release should be
delayed in case that kernel patches merge won't happen in several weeks.
The reason I ask this is that I want to make sure we are OK to merge
such new feature support to release branch.

-- 
Yao (齐尧)

Re: time to create the GDB 8.1.x branch?

[Joel Brobecker]

[question for everyone at the bottom]

Hi Yao,

> Arm still has pending patch series about new ARMv8.3-A Pointer
> Authentication feature support in GDB.  They were posted in Aug, and
> reviewed,
> 
> https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2017-08/msg00174.html
> https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2017-08/msg00175.html
> https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2017-08/msg00171.html
> https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2017-08/msg00172.html
> https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2017-08/msg00173.html
> https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2017-08/msg00176.html
> 
> The GDB support needs the new regset provided by Linux kernel, so
> these GDB patches can't go in until the kernel patches are merged.
> I think kernel patches will be merged in several (5?) weeks, is it OK to
> get these GDB patches into 8.1 release (mainline first and backport to
> 8.1 branch)?  To be clear, I don't expect GDB 8.1 release should be
> delayed in case that kernel patches merge won't happen in several weeks.
> The reason I ask this is that I want to make sure we are OK to merge
> such new feature support to release branch.

Considering that the new feature only seems to be activated when
the necessary hwcap flag is set, it seems fine for me to backport it.
The one concern I have, however, is that 5 weeks is a bit long for
us to wait. Typically, what I would expect is for us to cut the
branch, then take a two/three weeks for people to field-test and
stabilize, before we actually create the release.

I don't have a problem with delaying the release after the branch
get created, but 5 weeks takes us roughly to start of 2018. I would
add an extra week or two after your backport before we actually
release, just in case there are unexpected complications with
the patch. So, we're talking mid-January.

Any objections to a release around that time?

-- 
Joel

Re: time to create the GDB 8.1.x branch?

[Joel Brobecker]

> > https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2017-08/msg00174.html
> > https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2017-08/msg00175.html
> > https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2017-08/msg00171.html
> > https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2017-08/msg00172.html
> > https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2017-08/msg00173.html
> > https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2017-08/msg00176.html
> > 
> > The GDB support needs the new regset provided by Linux kernel, so
> > these GDB patches can't go in until the kernel patches are merged.
> > I think kernel patches will be merged in several (5?) weeks, is it OK to
> > get these GDB patches into 8.1 release (mainline first and backport to
> > 8.1 branch)?  To be clear, I don't expect GDB 8.1 release should be
> > delayed in case that kernel patches merge won't happen in several weeks.
> > The reason I ask this is that I want to make sure we are OK to merge
> > such new feature support to release branch.

BTW - something that could help me track the status of a patch
series like this one is if there was a GDB PR with a target milestone
of 8.1. That way, I don't have to track email messages by subject
or reference ID across multiple months; something we know the email
archives are not helping with. Instead, I just wait for the PR to move
to fixed.  Would that be possible?

Thanks!
-- 
Joel

Re: time to create the GDB 8.1.x branch?

[Yao Qi]

Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com> writes:

> Considering that the new feature only seems to be activated when
> the necessary hwcap flag is set, it seems fine for me to backport it.
> The one concern I have, however, is that 5 weeks is a bit long for
> us to wait. Typically, what I would expect is for us to cut the
> branch, then take a two/three weeks for people to field-test and
> stabilize, before we actually create the release.
>

Hi Joel,
Looks I overestimated the period after branch cut and release.  I
thought it is about 4 ~ 5 weeks, so I thought 4 weeks from now on,
kernel patches *may* be merged, and GDB is not released yet, so I can
squeeze these gdb patches in to 8.1 release.  If the period is only
2~3 weeks, I don't want to delay the release.  On the other hand, it
takes some time for distro to pick up the Linux kernel or backport these
kernel patches, the gdb feature can't be enabled without kernel support,
so it doesn't matter too much that this feature is in gdb 8.1 or 8.2.

> I don't have a problem with delaying the release after the branch
> get created, but 5 weeks takes us roughly to start of 2018. I would
> add an extra week or two after your backport before we actually
> release, just in case there are unexpected complications with
> the patch. So, we're talking mid-January.
>
> Any objections to a release around that time?

Understood.  I withdraw this proposal, and let us target your original
plan.

-- 
Yao (齐尧)

Re: time to create the GDB 8.1.x branch?

[Joel Brobecker]

> Looks I overestimated the period after branch cut and release.  I
> thought it is about 4 ~ 5 weeks, so I thought 4 weeks from now on,
> kernel patches *may* be merged, and GDB is not released yet, so I can
> squeeze these gdb patches in to 8.1 release.  If the period is only
> 2~3 weeks, I don't want to delay the release.  On the other hand, it
> takes some time for distro to pick up the Linux kernel or backport these
> kernel patches, the gdb feature can't be enabled without kernel support,
> so it doesn't matter too much that this feature is in gdb 8.1 or 8.2.
> 
> > I don't have a problem with delaying the release after the branch
> > get created, but 5 weeks takes us roughly to start of 2018. I would
> > add an extra week or two after your backport before we actually
> > release, just in case there are unexpected complications with
> > the patch. So, we're talking mid-January.
> >
> > Any objections to a release around that time?
> 
> Understood.  I withdraw this proposal, and let us target your original
> plan.

Thanks for the update, Yao. I moved your item to the excluded list
for now. But we can still consider it again if conditions become better:
Who knows, if the branch drags longer than anticipated, and the changes
in the kernel get in quickly, it might still make it...

-- 
Joel

Re: time to create the GDB 8.1.x branch?

[Sergio Durigan Junior]

On Monday, November 20 2017, Joel Brobecker wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I think it is time to start thinking about the next release (8.1),
> as it has been 5.5 months since we release 8.0, and 7 months
> since we created the 8.0.x branch!
>
> I've created the following wiki page for keeping track of this release
> cycle:
>
>     https://sourceware.org/gdb/wiki/GDB_8.1_Release
>
> Looking at the gdb/NEWS file, it shows a fair number of enhancements.
> Also, outside of one GDB PR that was marked for 8.1 but is no longer
> critical IMO, we have no PR active targetting 8.1.
>
> Are there any changes that would be worth waiting for before we branch
> 8.1? If not, I plan on creating the branch next Monday (Nov 27th).

Hi!

I'd like to get the 'ptype /o' feature in before we branch:

  <https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2017-11/msg00435.html>

There's a bug opened for this feature:

  <https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16224>

So I'll mark it for 8.1, is that OK?

Thanks,

-- 
Sergio
GPG key ID: 237A 54B1 0287 28BF 00EF  31F4 D0EB 7628 65FC 5E36
Please send encrypted e-mail if possible
http://sergiodj.net/

Re: time to create the GDB 8.1.x branch?

[Joel Brobecker]

> I'd like to get the 'ptype /o' feature in before we branch:
> 
>   <https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2017-11/msg00435.html>

OK. That could be an interesting feature indeed.

> There's a bug opened for this feature:
> 
>   <https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16224>

Even better!

> So I'll mark it for 8.1, is that OK?

Done for you :)
-- 
Joel

Re: time to create the GDB 8.1.x branch?

[Sergio Durigan Junior]

On Monday, November 27 2017, Joel Brobecker wrote:

>> I'd like to get the 'ptype /o' feature in before we branch:
>> 
>>   <https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2017-11/msg00435.html>
>
> OK. That could be an interesting feature indeed.
>
>> There's a bug opened for this feature:
>> 
>>   <https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16224>
>
> Even better!
>
>> So I'll mark it for 8.1, is that OK?
>
> Done for you :)

Thanks, Joel!

-- 
Sergio
GPG key ID: 237A 54B1 0287 28BF 00EF  31F4 D0EB 7628 65FC 5E36
Please send encrypted e-mail if possible
http://sergiodj.net/

Re: time to create the GDB 8.1.x branch?

[Pedro Alves]

Joel,

On 11/20/2017 07:15 PM, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> I think it is time to start thinking about the next release (8.1),
> as it has been 5.5 months since we release 8.0, and 7 months
> since we created the 8.0.x branch!
> 
> I've created the following wiki page for keeping track of this release
> cycle:
> 
>     https://sourceware.org/gdb/wiki/GDB_8.1_Release
> 
> Looking at the gdb/NEWS file, it shows a fair number of enhancements.
> Also, outside of one GDB PR that was marked for 8.1 but is no longer
> critical IMO, we have no PR active targetting 8.1.
> 
> Are there any changes that would be worth waiting for before we branch
> 8.1? If not, I plan on creating the branch next Monday (Nov 27th).

Can we consider delaying the branching some more time?  E.g., at least
a week?  I'm not certain I'll be able to address all of Keith's comments
on the wildmatching series this week (and I'd very much like to get it in
because the sooner we have that in a release, the sooner we can move
gdb to a C++ namespace), and also, a lot of folks in the US are off for
thanksgiving this week (including Keith :-).  There are a few other pending
patches that I'd like to try to get in (patches that have already been posted
but are waiting for review, e.g., DWARF5 indexes, Keith's inline
breakpoint and ptype patches, etc.), and next Monday is just looking too
tight.

Thanks,
Pedro Alves

Re: time to create the GDB 8.1.x branch?

[Joel Brobecker]

> Can we consider delaying the branching some more time?  E.g., at least
> a week?  I'm not certain I'll be able to address all of Keith's comments
> on the wildmatching series this week (and I'd very much like to get it in
> because the sooner we have that in a release, the sooner we can move
> gdb to a C++ namespace), and also, a lot of folks in the US are off for
> thanksgiving this week (including Keith :-).  There are a few other pending
> patches that I'd like to try to get in (patches that have already been posted
> but are waiting for review, e.g., DWARF5 indexes, Keith's inline
> breakpoint and ptype patches, etc.), and next Monday is just looking too
> tight.

Absolutely.

There are a number of patches that people would like to get in, and
I won't create the branch until I have at least given those a chance
to get in. Using the branch to help us decide which changes we want
to focus is good, but I don't want people to feel pressured into
rush them and/or cutting corners.  The calendar is only a reference
for us, but other than that, we only create the branch when we feel
this is a good time.

-- 
Joel

Re: time to create the GDB 8.1.x branch?

[Pedro Alves]

On 11/23/2017 04:50 PM, Joel Brobecker wrote:
>> Can we consider delaying the branching some more time?  E.g., at least
>> a week?  I'm not certain I'll be able to address all of Keith's comments
>> on the wildmatching series this week (and I'd very much like to get it in
>> because the sooner we have that in a release, the sooner we can move
>> gdb to a C++ namespace), and also, a lot of folks in the US are off for
>> thanksgiving this week (including Keith :-).  There are a few other pending
>> patches that I'd like to try to get in (patches that have already been posted
>> but are waiting for review, e.g., DWARF5 indexes, Keith's inline
>> breakpoint and ptype patches, etc.), and next Monday is just looking too
>> tight.
> 
> Absolutely.
> 
> There are a number of patches that people would like to get in, and
> I won't create the branch until I have at least given those a chance
> to get in. Using the branch to help us decide which changes we want
> to focus is good, but I don't want people to feel pressured into
> rush them and/or cutting corners.  The calendar is only a reference
> for us, but other than that, we only create the branch when we feel
> this is a good time.
> 

Thanks Joel.  I'll keep you posted.

Thanks,
Pedro Alves