This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: GCC version bikeshedding
- From: Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at libertysurf dot fr>
- To: Ian Lance Taylor <iant at google dot com>
- Cc: GCC Development <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Jason Merrill <jason at redhat dot com>, Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>, Richard Biener <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>
- Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2014 09:25:48 +0200
- Subject: Re: GCC version bikeshedding
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20140720165506 dot GT3003 at laptop dot redhat dot com> <201407291845 dot 14107 dot ebotcazou at libertysurf dot fr> <CAKOQZ8whj_m9yjYVdX_p24ocV25VRZwwmTf=VvGjEoxNeHbxSg at mail dot gmail dot com>
> What do you propose that we do?
Probably just jump to 5.0 (or 5.1) without the subsequent acceleration.
> Step 1: We agree that the current major revision number conveys no
> information, and therefore we will change the major revision number
> with every release. (I understand that you do not agree with this.)
> Step 2: Assuming we agree about step 1, what should the next version
> number be? Well, the current version is 4.9. Therefore, the next
> version should be 5.0. That seems entirely natural to me. Having the
> next release be 10.0 would make no sense to anybody who is not an
> active GCC developer.
I also disagree with the last assertion (for example Sun did that for Solaris)
but that's probably too much bikeshedding at this point.