From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4509 invoked by alias); 4 Oct 2004 05:00:44 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 4484 invoked from network); 4 Oct 2004 05:00:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO balder.inter.net.il) (192.114.186.15) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 4 Oct 2004 05:00:43 -0000 Received: from zaretski ([80.230.155.207]) by balder.inter.net.il (Mirapoint Messaging Server MOS 3.3.7-GR) with ESMTP id DUS85587 (AUTH halo1); Mon, 4 Oct 2004 07:00:38 +0200 (IST) Date: Mon, 04 Oct 2004 05:04:00 -0000 From: "Eli Zaretskii" To: Bob Rossi Message-ID: <01c4a9ce$Blat.v2.2.2$d01969a0@zahav.net.il> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 CC: gdb@sources.redhat.com In-reply-to: <20041003163918.GB7030@white> (message from Bob Rossi on Sun, 3 Oct 2004 12:39:18 -0400) Subject: Re: GDB/MI snapshots between major release's Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: <20041003163918.GB7030@white> X-SW-Source: 2004-10/txt/msg00039.txt.bz2 > Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2004 12:39:18 -0400 > From: Bob Rossi > > Here is my take, since Eli stated that MI is backwards compatible, I > think the version number should be bumped right before the release. The MI number should be bumped when an incompatibility is introduced on purpose, i.e. at the very moment when we decide to start a new MI version.