This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: 3.0 Branch
- To: Phil Edwards <pedwards at disaster dot jaj dot com>
- Subject: Re: 3.0 Branch
- From: Jeffrey A Law <law at redhat dot com>
- Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 21:27:59 -0700
- cc: "Joseph S. Myers" <jsm28 at cam dot ac dot uk>, Neil Booth <neil at daikokuya dot demon dot co dot uk>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Reply-To: law at redhat dot com
In message <20010214124411.A17088@disaster.jaj.com>you write:
> 2.98 on the branch sounds good. Or 3.0pre1, 3.0pre2, ..., 3.0pre99. :-)
In the past we've used stuff like
2.95 <date> prerelease
Which would suggest (if we follow existing conventions)
3.0 <date> prerelease
> 3.1 on the HEAD doesn't sound so good. It implies that we've already
> skipped past an existing 3.0. Once 3.0 is released, then 3.1 or 3.0x
> would seem correct.
And if we're following conventions this would be
3.1 <date> experimental
It's not my decision, I'm just letting folks know how we've done things
in the past.
jeff