State of maturity for gcc 2.95.3 and gcc 2.96

[Gerald Pfeifer]

On Sat, 14 Oct 2000, Toon Moene wrote:
> E.g., we define a release branch; hammer on it until it is "bug-free"
> (hah :-) and subsequently have weekly snapshots from _that branch_
> called GCC-3.0.n which are our "stable releases".

I see some problems with this approach:

 1. We will have a new release snapshot even if there has been no change.

 2. Consistency: Right now we can assume that most people use one out of a
    few version of the compiler, as do GNU/Linux distributions.

    If we update once a week, would distribution upgrade every week as
    well?
 
 3. Quality: Even for .point releases we probably want to do some quality
    control, e.g. by volunteer testers, where we mention (on a web page)
    whether some snapshot has been tested and, if so, how it fared on that
    platform.

Gerald
-- 
Gerald "Jerry" pfeifer@dbai.tuwien.ac.at http://www.dbai.tuwien.ac.at/~pfeifer/