This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH] Adjust develop.html to reflect recent practice
- From: Gerald Pfeifer <gerald at pfeifer dot com>
- To: Richard Guenther <rguenther at suse dot de>
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>, "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>, Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
- Date: Sun, 27 Sep 2009 00:23:59 +0200 (CEST)
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Adjust develop.html to reflect recent practice
- References: <alpine.LNX.email@example.com>
On Sun, 20 Sep 2009, Richard Guenther wrote:
> As commented to my last status report develop.html does not reflect
> reality anymore. The following tries to adjust it carefully in
> this respect.
I believe you got the math wrong in one case, when you went from
four months that a branch will need to be maintained in the old
model up to six months. Is it possible you ment to substract the
two months Stage 2 used to take instead of add it?
Since it seems hard to predicat the time between the end of Stage 3
and branching, I suggest to just say "a few months".
The patch below does that in its last hunk and makes one or the
other editorial change.
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/develop.html,v
retrieving revision 1.101
diff -u -3 -p -r1.101 develop.html
--- develop.html 20 Sep 2009 19:50:27 -0000 1.101
+++ develop.html 26 Sep 2009 22:21:10 -0000
@@ -108,17 +108,16 @@ well), then we can seriously confuse use
<p>During this period, changes of any nature may be made to the
compiler. In particular, major changes may be merged from branches.
-Stage 1 and its length is feature driven and its length will be
-at least four month.
+Stage 1 is feature driven and will last at least four months.
In order to avoid chaos, the Release Managers will ask for a list of
major projects proposed for the coming release cycle before the start
-of Stage 1. The Release Managers will attempt to sequence the projects
+of Stage 1. They will attempt to sequence the projects
in such a way as to cause minimal disruption. The Release Managers
will not reject projects that will be ready for inclusion before the
end of Stage 1. Similarly, the Release Managers have no special power
to accept a particular patch or branch beyond what their status
-as maintainers affords. The Release Managers role during Stage 1 is
-merely to attempt to order the inclusion of major features in an
+as maintainers affords. The role of the Release Managers during Stage 1
+is merely to attempt to order the inclusion of major features in an
<h4><a name="stage2">Stage 2</a></h4>
@@ -147,7 +146,7 @@ source base as we prepare for a release.
<p>Although maintaining a development branch, including merging new
changes from the mainline, is somewhat burdensome, the absolute worst
-case is that such a branch will have to be maintained for six months.
+case is that such a branch will have to be maintained for a few months.
During this period, the only mainline changes will be bug-fixes,
so it is unlikely that many conflicts will occur.</p>