This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: GCC 4.4.0 Status Report (2009-03-13)
- From: Paolo Bonzini <bonzini at gnu dot org>
- To: Richard Kenner <kenner at vlsi1 dot ultra dot nyu dot edu>
- Cc: gdr at integrable-solutions dot net, Joe dot Buck at synopsys dot com, dave dot korn dot cygwin at googlemail dot com, dberlin at dberlin dot org, dje dot gcc at gmail dot com, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, law at redhat dot com, mark at codesourcery dot com, rguenther at suse dot de, stevenb dot gcc at gmail dot com
- Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2009 16:38:03 +0100
- Subject: Re: GCC 4.4.0 Status Report (2009-03-13)
- References: <20090320165858.GI27119@synopsys.com> <20090322050024.GA18893@synopsys.com> <4aca3dc20903220547v8923d55v9ac593f8400be6a9@mail.gmail.com> <10903221258.AA04666@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu> <206fcf960903220718oefa452ek60dcc1d933e1e093@mail.gmail.com> <10903221441.AA05218@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu> <206fcf960903220808w4c04c0e9g74b25a55ea3d8b42@mail.gmail.com> <10903221517.AA05569@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu> <206fcf960903220823s6fe866fdja8c96e60bb3c432c@mail.gmail.com> <10903221537.AA05719@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu>
> Then you had the wrong understanding. ?The FSF has ALWAYS had the right to
> overrule technical decisions on ANY of their projects. ?The point is that
> this is a right they very rarely exercise.
Of course, just I (and others) don't see why they should do it in this
case. Delaying a *branch* is different from, say, using a proprietary
version control or bug tracking system.
Paolo