This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: GCC 4.4.0 Status Report (2009-03-13)
- From: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at integrable-solutions dot net>
- To: Richard Kenner <kenner at vlsi1 dot ultra dot nyu dot edu>
- Cc: bonzini at gnu dot org, Joe dot Buck at synopsys dot com, dave dot korn dot cygwin at googlemail dot com, dberlin at dberlin dot org, dje dot gcc at gmail dot com, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, law at redhat dot com, mark at codesourcery dot com, rguenther at suse dot de, stevenb dot gcc at gmail dot com
- Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2009 11:01:47 -0500
- Subject: Re: GCC 4.4.0 Status Report (2009-03-13)
- References: <20090320165858.GI27119@synopsys.com> <10903221258.AA04666@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu> <206fcf960903220718oefa452ek60dcc1d933e1e093@mail.gmail.com> <10903221441.AA05218@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu> <206fcf960903220808w4c04c0e9g74b25a55ea3d8b42@mail.gmail.com> <10903221517.AA05569@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu> <206fcf960903220823s6fe866fdja8c96e60bb3c432c@mail.gmail.com> <10903221537.AA05719@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu> <f865508f0903220838m55e7408fmd4ee68e84c6a8f5b@mail.gmail.com> <10903221604.AA05881@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu>
On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 11:04 AM, Richard Kenner
<kenner@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu> wrote:
>> Of course, just I (and others) don't see why they should do it in this
>> case. ?Delaying a *branch* is different from, say, using a proprietary
>> version control or bug tracking system.
>
> I don't either. ?Requesting a delay of a *release* on a license issue
> is completely and perfectly understandable, but what that has to do
> with making a *branch* makes absolutely no sense to me.
Indeed. That the SC seems to declare that it can't do anything
about it is even more puzzling.
-- Gaby