This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org 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]

Re: Beyond GCC 3.0: Summing Up

To: Carlo Wood <carlo at alinoe dot com>
Subject: Re: Beyond GCC 3.0: Summing Up
From: "H . J . Lu" <hjl at lucon dot org>
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 09:29:46 -0700
Cc: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>,Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at redhat dot com>,"dewar at gnat dot com" <dewar at gnat dot com>,"kenner at vlsi1 dot ultra dot nyu dot edu" <kenner at vlsi1 dot ultra dot nyu dot edu>,"gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
References: <orzoadxvh6.fsf@guarana.lsd.ic.unicamp.br> <333370000.994742904@warlock.codesourcery.com> <20010710004258.A10733@lucon.org> <20010710161711.B20118@alinoe.com>

On Tue, Jul 10, 2001 at 04:17:11PM +0200, Carlo Wood wrote:
> 
> So, as an outsider, allow me to propose a compromise:
> 
> Why don't we release a 3.0.1 that has NO regressions towards 3.0,
> that has no NEW regressions towards 2.95.3 and that fixes some
> important regressions towards 2.95.3.  Then we tell the users
> that this is a bug fix release but that it still has known regressions
> relative to 2.95.3.  It shouldn't be hard to make a list of these
> regressions.
> 

That is what I was saying. The only difference is I'd like to see
more frequent 3.0.x like that, say every 2 or 3 weeks.


H.J.

References:
- Re: Beyond GCC 3.0: Summing Up
  - From: Alexandre Oliva
- Re: Beyond GCC 3.0: Summing Up
  - From: Mark Mitchell
- Re: Beyond GCC 3.0: Summing Up
  - From: H . J . Lu
- Re: Beyond GCC 3.0: Summing Up
  - From: Carlo Wood

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