This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: GCC version bikeshedding

On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 5:38 PM, Jeff Law <> wrote:
> On 07/23/14 10:20, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>> I am also fine with it.
>> I think that if anybody has strong objections, now is the time to make
>> them.  Otherwise I think we should go with this plan.
>> To me, the basic summary of the idea is that there is no clear reason
>> to ever change the GCC major version number.  There were real
>> objections to changing it when we went from 3 to 4.  There will be
>> real objections for any future change from 4 to 5.  At the same time,
>> we face the fact that going from 4.9 to 4.10 will break some people's
>> existing scripts, as is also true of any other decision we can make.
>> Given that there is no clear reason to ever change the major version
>> number, making that change will not convey any useful information to
>> our users.  So let's just drop the major version number.  Once we've
>> made that decision, then the next release (in 2015) naturally becomes
>> 5.0, the release after that (in 2016) becomes 6.0, etc.
> Agreed.   It's not 100% perfect, but, IMHO, it's significantly better than
> what we're doing now and better than the various alternatives that have been
> proposed.

If a native speaker can cook something up for the head of gcc-5/changes.html
about this change that would be nice.  (yes, gcc-5/, not gcc-5.0/ ...)


> Jeff

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]