This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: A minor adjustment to the development plan
- From: Gerald Pfeifer <gerald at pfeifer dot com>
- To: Richard Kenner <kenner at vlsi1 dot ultra dot nyu dot edu>
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 17:18:41 +0200 (CEST)
- Subject: Re: A minor adjustment to the development plan
- References: <10309221349.AA20040@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu>
On Mon, 22 Sep 2003, Richard Kenner wrote:
> + * No regressions caused by the changes on the branch are logged against
> + the GCC bugtracking system or have been brought to the attention of
> + the branch maintainer(s) in some other way.
> My feeling is that there's a difference when a branch is merged in because of
> the size of the work being merged. Certainly we don't want a branch to
> introduce a lot of problems, but branch merging only occurs at a stage in the
> development cycle when we are willing to tolerate some instability.
I agree.
> My concern is that both the branch and the mainline will be moving targets
> and it may not be feasible to have a single point in time when all known
> regressions have been fixed.
What I had in mind were those cases where the branch (before the merge)
already contains regressions which have been known for several weeks,
that is, which are not related to the merger per se.
This was the case for the objective-c branch (where the problem was fixed
before the merge) and is the case for tree-ssa, for example, and I think
that such regressions should be fixed before proceeding with the merge.
I tried to relay this intent by using the wording above; do you have any
suggestions how to make it more clear?
Gerald
--
Gerald Pfeifer (Jerry) gerald@pfeifer.com http://www.pfeifer.com/gerald/