This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [RFC] Update Stage 4 description
- From: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com>
- To: Tom de Vries <tdevries at suse dot de>
- Cc: "gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, "gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Richard Biener <rguenther at suse dot de>, Gerald Pfeifer <gerald at pfeifer dot com>
- Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2019 09:02:04 +0000
- Subject: Re: [RFC] Update Stage 4 description
- References: <869742ac-5f7e-7673-48c4-f393a1e2eb65@suse.de>
On Wed, 9 Jan 2019 at 08:41, Tom de Vries <tdevries@suse.de> wrote:
>
> [ To revisit https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-04/msg00385.html ]
>
> The current formulation for the description of Stage 4 here (
> https://gcc.gnu.org/develop.html ) is:
> ...
> During this period, the only (non-documentation) changes that may be
> made are changes that fix regressions.
>
> Other changes may not be done during this period.
>
> Note that the same constraints apply to release branches.
>
> This period lasts until stage 1 opens for the next release.
> ...
>
> This updated formulation was proposed by Richi (with a request for
> review of wording):
> ...
> During this period, the only (non-documentation) changes that may
> be made are changes that fix regressions.
>
> -Other changes may not be done during this period.
> +Other important bugs like wrong-code, rejects-valid or build issues may
> +be fixed as well. All changes during this period should be done with
> +extra care on not introducing new regressions - fixing bugs at all cost
ISTM that this should be either "at any cost" or "at all costs". The
current wording can't make up its mind if it's singular or plural.
I also stumbled over "on not introducing" ... would that be better as
"to not introduce"?
> +is not wanted.
>
> Note that the same constraints apply to release branches.
>
> This period lasts until stage 1 opens for the next release.
> ...
>
> If a text can be agreed upon, then I can prepare a patch for wwwdocs.
>
> Thanks,
> - Tom