This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: GCC 4.3 release schedule
On 10/26/07, Mark Mitchell <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> I've found schedules for GCC to be very hard to predict. As I said in
> my status report, our practice has been to cut the release branch when
> we reach 100 regressions, and release 2-4 months after that point,
> depending on quality on the branch. To be honest, I'd rather wait
> longer to make the branch -- but there tends to be intense pressure in
> the developer community to make a branch so we can get on to the next
> round of major features. In any case, after we make the branch, it's in
> regression-only mode, so stability tends to be quite good, though
> dot-zero releases are, after all, dot-zero releases.
To jump in on the last fact - dot-zero releases are dot-zero releases - it
makes sense to expose the branch to wider testing by, at branching time,
exposing a dot-zero release to the public ;)
And I seriously dispute that branching and waiting has ever made the
branch of better quality just because we branched and waited. Instead
the opposite is true - developer ressources are dragged away to work
on their stage1 projects (that is true for myself).
I'd rather take the make the dot-zero release approach while branching
and count on interested people fixing bugs on the branch after the
dot-zero release. This way if nobody is interested on a particular
release series then we can declare the dot-zero release final - otherwise
we'd do more releases from the branch anyway.
Which still leaves us with the problem of setting criteria for releasing a
dot-zero. Being it 100 regressions or zero P1 bugs or whatever. Early
testing certainly helps here (sofar we are doing build-testing only, but
I expect to put the built binaries in "production" soon), but there are
still serious problems with 4.3 at the moment, like sorting out the libstdc++