This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: notes from gcc summit maintenance BOF
>Was the release process mentioned/discussed?
No, sadly. I'd mentioned a few things to Mark privately. These included:
1) possibly making a gcc-release mailing list, all maintainers must subscribe.
2) weekly status updates from mark with unique subject lines
In addition, as we have discussed in the past I'd love to see:
3) bi-monthly or tri-monthly planned releases of the stable branch for a year.
(Instead of, hey, let's make a release....)
Anyway. The other big issue with releases is adding some kind of
technical roadmap versus a strict time-based schedule. Interestingly,
Mark did indicate that gcc-3.5 (gcc-4?) should not be released without
tree-ssa, even if that forced a schedule slip.
>I think this is a real issue. I would like like us find some answers.
Well, I think the patch review process changes would help a lot. If
there was a patch server, for instance, and a patch queue then patch
review would be much simpler. (Ie, I have 5 patches in the queue, and
all five of them apply and don't introduce new errors).
I'm not quite sure that just throwing more maintainers at the problem
will help (See Brooks, The Mythical Man-Month).
-benjamin