Re: [Patch] libstdc++/14493

[Paolo Carlini <pcarlini at suse dot de>]

Benjamin Kosnik wrote:

> I don't think it blocks unrestrained development in new branchers: how?

I think by now we are on the same page about the general issue. To be 
clear: consider the present situation, we definitely want the debug-mode 
fixes + the exception fixes but those are not regressions and, in my 
opinion, not incredibly important, should go for safety in mainline 
only. Since we want simpler symbol versioning, we must add the fixes to 
4.2-branch too. There is certainly a tension caused by symbol versioning 
between free development (including non-blocker fixes) and safety.

Anyway, no problem, when in doubt will pragmatically ask, in the future, 
like this time.

> Ah. Serves me right to spread confusion when I, now corrected, say: 
> D'accordo?
>
> Thanks for this: quite informative.

You are welcome! One of these days I will ask you a bit of *real* 
french: by now probably you know it much better than me, notwithstanding 
it's a neo-latin language like italian... ;)

Paolo.