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: missing explanation of Stage 4 in GCC Development Plan document

On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 3:41 AM, Gerald Pfeifer <> wrote:
> fOn Tue, 28 Apr 2015, Richard Biener wrote:
>>>> Stage 2 has been missing for 7 years now, Stages 3 and 4 seem to blur
>>>> together, the "regression only" rule is more like "non-invasive fixes
>>>> only" (likewise for the support branches).
>>> Don't stage3 and stage4 differ in that substantial changes are still
>>> allowed for backends in stage3?
>> stage3 is for _general_ bugfixing while stage4 is for _regression_ bugfixing.
> I am wondering, do we want to keep this "forever", or adjust to
> the fact that stage 2 has been non-existent for a while?
> We may not want to redefine stage 3 to 2 and stage 4 to 3, but could
> use stage A, B, and C?  (Or in fact alpha, beta, and RC phases which
> is what this essentially has become?)

I think we'd want to transition to more descriptive stage names.  Like
"Development Stage" (stage1), "Stabilization Stage" (stage3) and
"Release Stage" (stage4).  Note that Stage 4 is equal to the state
release branches are in (but we didn't yet branch for the release),
thus "Release Branch Stage" would be even better but also possibly
confusing (there isn't a branch).


> Gerald

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